泰勒与兹拉

　　在著名的经典影片《人猿星球》(1968年)中，宇航员泰勒(查尔顿·赫斯顿饰)，与他的组员一起陷入了沉睡，不知不觉中以接近光速的速度跨越了两千年的时光，来到了未来。醒来后，他们紧急迫降在一个“遥远”的星球上。这个星球上不会说人话的居民偷走了他们所有的装备。紧接着他们就遭到了一群高度发达的会说话的大猩猩的袭击，在手无寸铁的情况下连连受到侵害。泰勒自己受了伤，被装入了一个猿类城市的动物园笼子里。在这里他遇到了喜爱人类的黑猩猩兹拉(金·亨特饰)。后者将他解救了出来。在共同逃往“禁区”的途中，他们发现了一个布满遗迹的洞穴，这个洞穴暗示着高度发达的人类文明遗留下的痕迹。满怀感激之情的泰勒在这里与兹拉告别，在她的唇上留下了温柔的一吻，然后继续前行。不久之后他就看到了倒塌的自由女神像，意识到他来到的正是两千年后的地球，这时候人类文明已经被一场核战争摧毁了。

　　泰勒与兹拉的告别之吻是卡萝莉内·巴赫曼和施特凡·班茨所创作的《听不懂》的原型，这个作品也是他们迄今为止做过的最大尺寸的绘画作品，为390 x 300 cm。这一幅作品可以说是他们从2004年以来合作创作的一系列作品中的代表之作，集中体现了他们的艺术观念。这一幅具有社会政治意义的作品，通过具有符号特征的题材展示了不同的存在意义层面。这幅画面最初的形式是一次影视表演，是人工化的产品，而在作品中，这一画面却被转换成了纪念碑似的宏大形象，在颜色使用上两个角色形成了不同寻常的对比。在这里，本身无甚希奇之处的爱慕动作被转化为了一个戏剧性的意味丰富的演绎形式。例如，人性在这里既得到了生动刻画又被揭示为本质荒诞。一个人类亲吻一个猿猴(后者实际上也不过是一个披上了伪装的人类!)，这样的事实一方面唤起了对于他者，对于异类，对于动物的尊重，同时却又是让人恼怒惹人厌恶的。也许很多人都会有那么一刻觉得受到了羞辱。我们的存在包含着的悖论在这里通过一种独特的形式得到了展现。《听不懂》，很多时候我们在自己的世界里其实一无所知，尽管我们总是假装自己懂得一切。因此我们可以躬身自问：这一个吻是面对异类时，一种和平、尊重和爱的信号吗，所谓的同一个世界同一个梦想?或者这昭示的是整个社会即将沦落的境况?也许是面具之后的藏匿，也许是真诚不讳的道白。但是，这幅画不正是既怪异又诙谐，既充满讽刺也带着戏剧化的效果的吗?对于生命以及生命中包含的艺术、演艺、真相，我们究竟可不可以那么较真呢?实际上，这一幅画首先是一种启示，一种触发思考的契机，它让我们自己探求合适的答案。

　　卡萝莉内·巴赫曼和施特凡·班茨对于世界以及世界如何被我们所感知有着细致微妙的观察。他们关注日常生活、文化和政治中的社会运行机制，促成这样的运行机制的则是摄影、电影、网络和杂志。他们同时也考察在媒介和语境发生变换时所传达内容的丢失、伪造和误解。图像可以传达什么?对熟悉的素材和主题稍作改动或者推移，或者让其与脱离原先语境的陌生因素相结合，或者对其进行了增删之后，让它们作为绘画作品重新出现，这个时候又会发生什么呢?原先的内容和表述会发生怎样的变化?对于我们这些观者又会产生什么作用呢?在这里引人注目的首先是这些再熟悉不过的画面和人物形象。他们如此广为人知，以至于他们的内容早已被淘空，在某种意义上来说已经成为成功、威权、美和虚荣的识别符号。而对这些符号的把玩就催生出了具有惊人效果的绘画作品，这些作品始终在各种感情的交集中徘徊反复，让我们陷入深深的迷惑之中。

　　当我开火的时候

　　虽然卡萝莉内·巴赫曼和施特凡·班茨2004年6月才决定要进行共同创作，但是实际上他们的合作可以说在一年之前就已经开始了。这就是题为《我的四十岁生日》的作品。这一幅作品是为班茨在卢森附近的克里恩斯举办的个展《一颗简单的心》而作的。这件绘画作品展示的是穆罕默德·阿塔在2001年9月11日通过机场安全检查，从而踏上不归路的情景。这一画作的触发点是，9月11日恰好是施特凡·班茨的生日，而画中的主题正是这一场浩劫的关键时刻。如果当时阿塔和他的同谋未能通过安全检查，这一天也许就会完全不一样，而世界的进程也许将完全走向另外一个方向。这一幅再现世界当代史上这一关键时刻的画作就其画面本身来看却似乎显得平淡无奇。如果人们不知道，现在入关的是阿塔，如果画面的左上角没有标明录像拍摄时的日期和时间，也许这幅图画就不会引人注目。一个看似平常毫无异状的情景却隐藏着一种难以触摸的罪行，这正是两位艺术家的用意所在。在他们看来，一幅画面不仅仅是展示它表面所有的东西，它同时也在展示另外的不可见的东西。我们经常会遇到披着羊皮的狼，而以凶暴面目出现的，其实质常常也不过是一只柔顺的绵羊。正是这种隐匿引起了两位艺术家的兴趣，他们激发我们以不同的方式从多个角度来观察种种事件。

　　这两位艺术家合作的第一件作品是2004年夏天创作的《当我开火的时候》。画面上美国政府首脑人物在整体上形成了一团让人不安的黑色。在背景的墙上隐约可以看到在第二次世界大战中在集中营里丧生的安娜·弗兰克的肖像画。而以文本形式出现的关于空军战十的残篇断章则是从罗伊·里希滕斯泰因的一幅作品中挪用来的，这就形成了一种插图效果。这些形式各异、含义丰富的元素导致了多层次和多义性的解读。政治威权持有者，纳粹种族灭绝行为的受害者，波普艺术的英雄在画面中并存不悖。世界历史与个人历史交汇而当下的事件与二战历史形成呼应，而且间接指向了越南战争。六十年代，里希滕斯泰因的美国正是笼罩在越战的阴影中。这一种强调观念的图像语言在这里将不同的层面、时代和语境糅合在了一起，并且以幽默诙谐的方式刻画了我们这个时代的社会政治景象。

　　两位艺术家自己创作的多是大尺寸的绘画作品，现在这种偏好得到了延续。在下一部作品《我射杀了一个肯尼迪》中，他们画的是美国的重金属摇滚乐队活结。这一个乐队总是戴着面具出场，喜欢在舞台上制造相当有戏剧感的轰动场面。在新千年的开端，他们在西方舆论界颇受非议，人们认为他们以“过激”的歌词和“颓废”的演出教唆青少年滥用暴力。在前几年，甚至有人影射他们对当时美国和德国中学中大量的持凶滥杀事件负有部分责任。但是只要是亲身经历过活结乐队的演出的人，都可以看到，这些责难很难自圆其说。他们的舞台表演如此夸张和荒诞，以至于更接近喜剧性的效果，而不会形成对社会的实质性危害。这一件作品的构思与《当我开火的时候》恰成对照，画面上同样可以读到一个文本，这是著名的艺术家莱蒙德·贝蒂伯作品中的一段话，话的开头是一个问题“我射杀了一个肯尼迪，你干了什么?”同样的，这里不同的层面也互相结合在了一起，激发出了一种介于惊恐与幽默，戏剧化与严肃，诱惑与威吓的强烈的感情效果，其中传达的信息则是多义性的。

　　在随后的作品中，登场的有电影明星如克林特·伊斯特伍德、约翰·福特、丹尼斯·霍珀，历史人物如威廉·莎士比亚，摇滚歌星如猫王、柯特·科本，艺术家如帕布罗·毕加索，作家如托马斯·品钦，音乐人如里克·鲁宾，也有政治掌权者如菲德尔·卡斯特罗、理查德·尼克松、英国女王伊丽莎白或者近东的军事和政治领袖。这些人物都被安入了一个新的语境中，常常相互组合，通过相似性或者相关性暗中指向了当下的艺术界景况。另外我们还可以看到三件以正义和邪恶、罪责和原罪、真理和谎言为主题的作品：《伏击》、《死刑宣判》、《死岛》。

　　死岛

　　在《伏击》中，我们看到的是六个美国三十年代的西部警察。在1934年，他们用160多次机抢扫射当时著名的雌雄大盗邦妮和克莱德，将其击毙，后来被当时的媒体拍摄下来并且大肆宣扬(在画作中他们站立在大卫·林奇电影中的迷失高速路的宾馆这几个字前)。而在《死刑宣判》的画面上，查尔斯·曼森的杀人集团中的年轻女子正大笑着离开刚刚宣布完审判结果的法庭。这两幅作品都揭示了暴力行动的荒谬性，一个是来自所谓执法的“正义”，另一个则是从非法的“邪恶”的角度，而实际上两者殊途同归。暴力始终是暴力，不管来自谁人之手。最后，在小型的绘画作品《死岛》中，对阿诺尔德·博克林作于1890年的同名画作的影射是明白可见的。同时这幅作品又是对意大利北部的瓦洋特水库的惨剧的刻画。1963年，这座当时世界上最高的双曲拱坝失效，造成了巨大的灾难。这一灾难本来是可以避免的，因为当时的负责人知道，一旦他们将过多水流导入水库就会造成山体滑坡。尽管如此他们仍然听任水库中水暴涨，结果20万吨的岩体发生高速滑坡，冲入水库，造成了高达280米的涌浪，像海啸一样席卷坝体，泄入山谷，造成了4000人丧生。不过在画作中并看不到这些惨状。画面上是深夜时分，暗淡的月光洒在264米高的雄伟堤坝上。这座堤坝紧贴湖岸，巍然耸立。一艘轮船正恬静安然地驶向这座庞然大物，为这充满了英雄气概的景观平添一份诱人的美感。

　　那科索斯与回声

　　卡萝莉内·巴赫曼和施特凡·班茨专为麦勒画廊创作的两个装置作品《那科索斯》和《回声》，处理的是自恋和反照的主题。在希腊神话中，那科索斯是河神科菲索斯和莱里奥普的儿子，以美貌著称。根据传说，这个追求者众多的少年拒绝了回声仙女的爱情。为此他受到了复仇女神的惩罚(一说是爱神阿芙罗狄忒的惩罚)，对自己在水中的倒影产生了不可遏抑的爱情。这就验证了先知泰勒西雅斯的说法，即只有当他认不出自己的时候，他才能享有长寿。有一天，他坐在一个湖边想观赏自己的影子，忽然，在神的安排下一片树叶落到了水中，引起的涟漪破坏了水中影子的相貌。那科索斯误以为是自己变得丑陋了，于是惊吓而死。死后，他的躯体变成了一朵水仙花。

　　装置作品《那科索斯》是地面上的一个四方形的黑色区域，实际是一个平整的水槽，大约5厘米高，盛满了水。在水面上有一个约200厘米高的木材装置，上面安装了一个35毫米电影摄影机模型，摄影机镜头朝向水中，似乎是在拍摄自己的倒影。自我与镜像，原型与拷贝，虚像与真实，对自我观赏的迷恋，对它者的逃避，转向内心的独语---这一切也可以是对好莱坞大电影业的写照。可是，摄像头真的拍下了自己吗?这个摄影机是真的在工作吗，或者它不过是个摆设而已?在传统的艺术史中，雕塑作品始终是一种摹仿、一种拷贝、一种对存在物的象征：受难基督，抱子圣母，圣者塞巴斯蒂安等等。丹尼斯·霍珀的令人难以忘怀的电影《最后一场电影》1971年在好莱坞制作完成，但是在第一次试映之后就被撤回，再也没有投入院线。在这部电影中，秘鲁的一个村庄的居民用木材制作了一个摄影机模型，用它来拍自己的西部片，结果村庄中真的硝烟弥漫，枪声不绝，血肉横飞。我们看到的，绝不仅仅只是我们看到的。或者，真正发生着的，我们并看不到。

　　同样的，在第二个装置作品《回声》中，涉及的同样是观看的结果，还有反思，反思我们如何感知那些一开始并不为人所见的东西。如果我们没有登上这个黑色立方体250厘米高的梯子，那我们看到的不过是四方形的黑色物体，而一旦我们鼓足勇气登了上去，朝立方体的内部看去，那么我们看到的就是一个水面上反射的我们自己的影像。这也正是我们的存在的根基所在：勇气、跨越、好奇心和自我反思，不如此无以存活。

李双志 译

　　阿兰·史密西

　　1967年诞生于好莱坞，同年便导演了第一部电影《Death of a Gunfinger》(1969年上映)。初出茅庐之作，居然受到了媒体不少好评。《纽约时报》就曾如此评论该片：“它出自史密西先生犀利的导演风格，他有最敏锐的触觉，仅仅一眼扫过人们的脸庞就能够捕捉到最精准的背景细节。”《综艺》中这样写道“在史密西执导的电影中，演员的表演非常紧凑;他能够将配角塑造成令人难忘的角色。”他的创作异常地广泛而多面。多年来，他创作的作品种类和风格迥然各异，他制作过70多部电影和剧本。今天，他是美国电影界最知名的人士之一。

　　Taylor and Zira

　　In the motion picture classic Planet of the Apes(1968) the astronaut Taylor(Charlton Heston) travels some two thousand years into the future，at approximate light speed and kept in an artificial coma together with his crew.At one point they are forced to make an emergency landing on a “faraway”planet where humans who communicate in grunts steal all of their equipment.Soon after this mishap，they are attacked by a group of highly developed talking gorillas who hunt them down like wild game.Taylor is injured and finds himself caged in the zoo in a city of apes.There he meets the chimpanzee female Zira(Kim Hunter) who likes humans and sets him free.During their escape into the “forbidden zone”they chance upon a cave full of artifacts that indicate an advanced human civilization.Taylor takes leave of Zira，kisses her softly on the mouth and rides away.But only a little later he stands agape，looking at the sunken remains of the Statue of Liberty，and realizes that he is in fact back on Earth，where man-made civilization has been obliterated by nuclear war in the meantime.

　　The parting kiss of Taylor and Zira is the model image for Ting Bu Dong，the hitherto largest-sized painting(390 ×300 cm) by Caroline Bachmann and Stefan Banz.One might call this work，representative of all their jointly created art since 2004，a perfect example of the concept of these two artists.It is a sociopolitical piece that points to a number of different strands of existential meaning with its emblematic subject.The painting in its original form is a staging，an artificial production which here，in its monumental realization and the bewildering contrasts between the characters achieved by the coloring，transforms an essentially harmless gesture of affection into a dramatic and multi-layered presence.The expression of humanity，for instance，is thus both celebrated and reduced to absurdity.The fact that we watch a human kissing an ape(though really just a human in disguise) generates，on the one hand，something like respect towards the Other，the alien and the animal，but at the same time it feels irritating and repulsive and maybe viewers catch themselves for a moment in their own embarrassment.The paradox of our existence is taken to a significant form of expression here.Ting bu dong-often we do not understand a thing in our world even though we pretend to understand everything.We might ask questions such as，Is this kiss a sign of peace，of respect，of love for the most wildly different forms of being-“one world，one dream”-or is it rather an indicator of a deeply decadent society?Does it mean hiding behind a mask or does it make a straightforward statement?But is it not a rather funny，ironic，humorous，and theatrical sight?Can life-and included in it: art，theater，or truth-be taken that seriously at all?The painting is therefore primarily an impulse，a generating force，and leaves us to draw our own conclusions from it.

　　Caroline Bachmann and Stefan Banz are sensitive observers of the world and also of how we perceive it.They are interested in the social mechanisms in everyday life，in culture and politics，which are communicated by photography，film，the Internet，and magazines.Above all，they explore the lost elements，the falsifying，the misconceiving of material by its transformation into other media and contexts.What can images convey and what happens when familiar subjects and themes reemerge-ever so slightly altered or modified，or associated with extraneous elements，or with certain aspects added or omitted-in the world of painting?In what way does this change the content and what effect does it provoke in us，the beholders?The artists devote particular attention to images or persons who are so well-known that they have in fact long been devoid of any content，representing somehow mere formulas of recognition for concepts such as success，power，beauty，or appearance.This creates explosive paintings which oscillate wildly between the emotions，effectively undermining our very sense of security.

　　As I Opened Fire

　　Although Caroline Bachmann and Stefan Banz decided to work together only in June 2004，their cooperation had in some way already started the year before with a painting titled My 40th Birthday that had been made for Banz’ exhibition Un cœur simple at Museum im Bellpark in Kriens near Lucerne.It showed Mohammed Atta passing through the passport control at Logan Airport on the morning of September 11，2001，on his way to his dastardly doings.What provoked this work was the fact that September 11 happens to be Stefan Banz’s birthday，and that the snapshot for him is something of a key moment for the 9/11 disaster.If Atta and his accomplices hadn’t succeeded in getting through this checkpoint，the day might have had a wildly different course and the fate of the world could have taken another direction.This picture，which shows a fatal moment in recent history，is nonetheless in itself entirely harmless.The image would be rather inconspicuous if we didn’t know that this is Atta who just went past the last barrier and if we didn’t have the date and time stamp of the video footage inserted in the upper left.So this intrinsically innocuous and unspecific scene conceals an unfathomable crime，which is just what the two artists had in mind with their portrayal.For them，a picture never shows merely what it shows but at the same time it always stands for something else，something it hides.And very often you encounter the wolf in sheep’s clothing，while aggressive behavior frequently disguises a meek lamb.This obscurity is what interests them，and they challenge us to take a good look at what we see in ever-changing ways and from several different viewpoints.

　　The first painting that their cooperation actually engendered was As I Opened Fire，created in 2004.It shows the principal players of the US administration grown together into a menacing black blotch.On the wall in the background we recognize the unassuming portrait of Anne Frank，the girl killed in a concentration camp during Word War II，while the snippet of an air-combat radio message borrowed from a Roy Lichtenstein artwork serves as the painting’s caption.These discrete elements，each of which is loaded with connotation，prompt a multi-layered and plurivalent reading.Powerful political leaders，a victim of Nazi persecution and a pop-art hero converge in this work: world history confronting personal narrative，with current events finding an echo in World War II and，by a roundabout route，also in the Vietnam War which had a decisive influence on the 1960s and Lichtenstein’s America.These conceptually oriented metaphorics bring into connection widely different levels，eras and contexts，while simultaneously drawing，with wit and humor，a sociopolitical picture of our time.

　　Their cooperation has continued in line with this philosophy，mostly with large-sized paintings.In their next work，I Shot A Kennedy，they portray the US trash metal band Slipknot who never goes onstage without masks，putting on a rather histrionic show.At the turn of the millennium，Slipknot was frequently accused by Western media of egging on adolescents to excesses of violence with their “extreme”lyrics and their “decadent”behavior.Several years ago，they were even indirectly given some responsibility for having been the primary cause for numerous runs amok at US and German schools-though whoever has been to a Slipknot concert will have trouble relating to this because their stage performance is so absurd and deliriously over the top that they come across more like an ensemble of comedians than a grave threat to society.As it was created as a sort of counterpart to As I Opened Fire，this canvas also uses written statements，taken from a work of the well-known artist Raymond Pettibon and starting with the question “I shot a Kennedy，what did you do?”Again，several levels are suggestively intertwined here，generating strong emotions between shock and humor，hysterics and seriousness，attraction and revulsion and leaving a message that remains ambiguous.

　　In their subsequent compositions we encounter movie celebrities such as Clint Eastwood，John Ford and Dennis Hopper，historic figures like William Shakespeare，rock stars like Elvis and Kurt Cobain，artists like Pablo Picasso，authors like Thomas Pynchon and music moguls like Rick Rubin，but also political potentates-Fidel Castro，Richard Nixon，Queen Elisabeth II or several military and religious leaders from the Middle East-all of them embedded in new contexts and quite often coupled with reminiscences or references to the current art scene.Apart from that，there are also-with Ambush(The Killers Of Bonnie & Clyde)，Death Sentence(The Charles Manson Girls) and Toteninsel-three works covering the subjects of right and wrong，crime and punishment，truth and deception.

　　Toteninsel

　　While Ambush displays the six sheriffs who were photographed and celebrated by the press in 1934 after gunning down Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow with more than 160 machine gun rounds(in the painting they are standing in front of David Lynch’s Lost Highway Hotel)，in Death Sentence we see the young women from the Charles Manson Family right after the judge’s decision，laughing their way out of the court room.Both works exemplify the absurdity of violence，once on the side of “justice”and once on that of “crime”-and in the two paintings there is indeed no difference at all.Violence is violence，no matter who commits it.Finally，the little piece Toteninsel presents us with a quotation of Arnold Böcklin’s famous painting from 1890 bearing the same title.At the same time，it alludes to the appalling catastrophe in the North Italian Vajont valley where in 1963 there was a momentous accident involving the highest arch dam of its time.The tragedy could have been prevented because several people in charge were well aware that as soon as they’d raise the water level behind the dam，an enormous landslide could occur.Even so，they let the water in and two hundred thousand tons of mountain crashed into the reservoir at an incredible speed，causing a flood wave of 280 meters in height to gush over the dam and down into the valley like a tsunami.The disaster took close to 4000 lives.On the painting，we see nothing of all this.It is night，and the moon casts a pale light on the magnificent retaining wall，towering 264 meters over the edge of a lake.A pleasure boat slowly and silently approaches the looming monster，bestowing a seductive beauty to the heroic landmark.

　　Narcissus and Echo

　　The two installations Narziss and Echo that Caroline Bachmann and Stefan Banz created especially for the spacious rooms of Galerie Urs Meile in Beijing concern themselves with the subject of self-absorption and reflection.In Greek mythology，Narcissus was the beautiful son of the river god Kephisos and Leiriope.Legend has it that the much-wooed lad scorned the love of nymph Echo，in punishment whereof the avenging deity Nemesis(according to some other sources，Aphrodite) made him fall hopelessly in love with his own image reflected in the water.In this way，the prophecy of the blind seer Teiresias was fulfilled，according to which Narcissus would only have a long life if he never knew himself.One day，he sat by the lake to delight in his mirror image when，by divine intervention，a leaf fell into the water，creating waves that disturbed the reflection.Whereupon he died from shock at the intuition that he was ugly(because the waves distorted his portrait).After his death he was transformed into a daffodil(Narcissus is the botanic genus of that flower).

　　The installation Narziss consists of a square black floor space-a shallow basin filled with some 5 cm of water.In the center of this liquid quadrangle there is a wooden construction of about 200 cm in height on which a 35 mm movie camera is mounted that is trained on the water and films its own reflection.Image and reflection，original and imitation，being in love with gazing at one’s own accomplishments，turning away from the outside world，communicating only within one’s peer group: all this might as well be a perfect characterization of great Hollywood cinema.But does the camera really film itself?Is it working or nothing but a dummy?Traditionally，the sculpture in art history has always been a replica，a reproduction，a symbol of something that exists in reality: Jesus on the Cross，Mary holding the Christ child，St.Sebastian full of arrows.There is this unforgettable motion picture by Dennis Hopper，The Last Movie，produced by Hollywood in 1971 but never distributed after the first previews.In it，the inhabitants of a little village in Peru put together a dummy wooden camera to make their own Western movie in which they shoot each other with live ammunition and get into bloody fistfights.What we see is never only what we see.Or: what really happens may not be visible to us.

　　From that point of view，the second installation，Echo，is also about the experience of seeing and about the reflection of perceiving what is not perceptible at first.As long as we haven’t climbed the steps of the 250 cm high cube，we just see a rectangular black shape，and when we bring ourselves to go up and peer into the cube’s inside，we look onto a water surface returning our own reflection.That is the ultimate ground of our being-courage，conquering one’s fears，curiosity，and self-reflection in order to survive.

　　Alan Smithee

　　Born in Hollywood in 1967，the same year he directed his first motion picture，Death of a Gunfighter(released in 1969).This debut feature film received high critical praise from the press.Thus the New York Times called it “…sharply directed by Alan Smithee who has an adroit facility for scanning faces and extracting sharp background detail.”And Variety wrote that “Smithee’s direction keeps the action taut and he draws convincing portrayals from the supporting cast.”His œuvre is exceptionally widespread and multifarious.Over the years，he has been working in the most diverse genres and styles，producing more than seventy pictures and screenplays.Today he is one of the most well known personalities in the US movie business.