坎勒是一位很重生存品味和质量的艺术家。

　　在现当代形态的艺术家中，很少见他这样在生存和艺术两个层面上，执着地将精致完美、深入等原本属于古典文化精神的标准令人信服地移植于现当代艺术之中。面对坎勒的艺术作品和艺术态度我常常想，如果在古典时代他定然是一位出色的古典主义艺术家，但命运却将他诞生于现当代时空，但坎勒却绝非一个对诞生的时代存拒斥之心的人，他是真实的现代主义者。于是在坎勒的身上我看到了他区别于一般现当代艺术家的心态，他非常的淡定、自省，在他的精神和艺术观念之中，他是从结构形态的层次上将古典的文化和美学精神进行了具有个人性特征的创造性转换。在坎勒那里，人生和艺术是整合的，这其实就是叔本华美学的人生态度。

　　一

　　1996年坎勒在中国美术馆主办个展。个展的作品体现了他在北京中央美院徐悲鸿油画进修班结业后的探索和思考的成果。比较他在湘的艺术有了长足的进步，我是熟悉并欣赏他作为湖南青年艺术家代表性画家的艺术作品的，但此次美术馆的一些新作，还是使我有“士别三日”之慨。我是他的这个展览的学术主持人，作为学术主持者，我为他写了一篇小文，并在开幕式上有一个由衷而有欣然的讲话，今天想来，依稀记得有两个意思，一是坎勒艺术探索的特征和意义，二是强调了年少如斯而能在中国美术馆举办个人展览的可贵和勇气。

　　十六年前坎勒在中国美术馆的这个个人展览，就我所知，应该是湖南年轻一代画家的第一人，虽然有年少盛的意思，但其作品却并不稚拙，事实上他展览作品在两个方面给人们留下深刻的印象，并得到了北京美术界同行的赞誉和一些权威人士的激赏。展览在北京的成功。对一个外籍青年画家来说是非常难得的。我曾经跟很多外籍青年画家，包括坎勒都说过，北京是文化故都，至今还是当代中国的文化艺术中心，一个艺术家没有北京的经历，背景和检验，要成大气候是很困难的。但北京这个关卡又是极难过的。我在此前曾不止一次地在外籍画家讨论会听到北京美术界人士的一些中肯而又近似残酷的评论。有一部苏联著名电影故事片，是讲述外籍苏联年轻一代在莫斯科生存发展的艰辛，电影的标题是：“莫斯科不相信眼泪”其实北京更是如此，它更不相信失败者的眼泪。这个事实自古皆然，中国唐代诗话就有一个著名故事，当时正值少年白居易拿着的诗抄拜见诗人宰相顾况时，顾况的第一句话就是：“长安米贵，居大不易”，但看到白居易的名句“野火烧不尽，春风吹又生”时，又改变话锋曰：“有才如此，居易不难”。白居易故然是大才，但顾况也是火眼金睛。后来的故事是，白居易的诗名和成就远在顾况之上。这则诗话在历史时空中流播，讲叙的是天才和命运的佳话。

　　其实，坎勒在中国美术馆的成功，说是年少得志，亦不为过，以我对他的才情的了解，我曾期望他趁势在北京发展，但坎勒又是一个

　　有责任心的男人和孝子，上有父母，下有妻儿，人不能完全为艺术而生存，于是坎勒还是选择返回湖南老家去了。临走放下一句话：一俟家事就绪，一定再来北京。

　　一晃十多年，坎勒在湖南，齐家尽孝之外，事业未尝懈怠，我在北京听到的都是朋友快慰的好消息，作品在全国大展夺得银牌，当了市美协主席、大学系主任等，家里的事也是完美顺心。看到坎勒这一切，我不禁感叹，坎勒真是一个完美主义者，不但艺术追求完美，家庭生活、为人、为父、为夫、为之、为友皆然。

　　果然，坎勒为了事业的约定，再次来到了北京，先在中央美院做了一年访问学者，然后在宋庄租了画室，做起了北漂艺术家。

　　二

　　在北京几年的探索和思考使坎勒的艺术进入了一个新的境界。

　　从本质上说，缘于坎勒人性层次上的完美主义和精神追求，使他顺理成章地对绘画语言在本体上有一种近乎痴迷的追求，一个画家到了这个程度，学术的研究和分析很难再有更多的话要说，于是我只能将其归结于天赋，这天赋既是感觉的，又是能力的。坎勒在北京的一系列新作，如:《在那里》、《幻影》、《大楼系列》、《舰队》、《神舟计划》等作品，所达到是表达语言精致、缜密和高贵，就是语言和形式本体的深度，这种语言的深度常常使我有触动了神经末梢的感觉。但是，坎勒同时又是十分敏锐的和有鲜度的——达到了这个程度，我只能相信，坎勒的语言和他的精神最为敏锐的部分发生了关系，他的笔化合了心灵、精神和感觉。

　　同时，坎勒的作品又有一种幽深感和神秘性。它既不荒诞，又不是梦幻，仿佛画家是将我们引向由他的心灵之光所照亮的现实。

　　在表达方式上，坎勒应当属当代艺术家中最早的将新的材质引入艺术表达的画家之一。十多年前坎勒在美术馆的个展中，就有一批极富新的视觉感染力的作品，坎勒将其定名“玻卡水彩画”，说是水彩，其实已经没有了多少水彩的特征，但它们是从水彩艺术的表达元素中发展出来的，和传统的水彩画相比，坎勒的“玻卡水彩画”作品在视觉强度和厚度感上要大大地优于传统水彩画。今天坎勒的作品，已将“玻卡纸”，移入油画布，但他还是保留并展开了在“玻卡纸”上沉淀下来的表达方式和语言，这样就使他的新作，具有了引起美术界同行和批评家关注的表现力，可以说，坎勒在语言方式上，在当今艺术界是十分独特而有个人性的，因此就语言表达而论，坎勒的艺术可以在学术上定义当代性的。

　　三

　　在精神上的完美追求，使坎勒一直在自己的艺术中坚守着审美的理想和原则。应该指出的是，他的这种坚守是发乎人性的，而非思潮和时尚的。

　　发韧于西方的现当代主义美术运动，最后导致了所谓的“艺术的终结”的公案。上个世纪初西方权威艺术理论家就指出了这个事实，但深究起来，这里所说的“终结”，实际上是指古典艺术所承担的审美使命已经终结了，巴尼特•纽曼在1948年就说到：“现代艺术的冲动就是毁掉美的这种欲望——这是通过彻底否定艺术与美的问题有任何关系进行的，自杜桑的《泉》一出，艺术就似乎成为了'形式生动的哲学'了——这其实是“黑格尔惊人的历史哲学图景在杜桑作品中几乎得到了惊人的确认””。(阿瑟•丹托《艺术的终结》)

　　只要具有稍许思想判断力的艺术家，在欧洲的文化空间中都会相信阿瑟•丹托理论的一定合理性，但这是西方的文化语境，把它生硬的移植到中国并简单地认为在中国审美也应该终结，那就太简单和糊涂了!原因很简单，欧洲在文艺复兴后将审美文化发展成文化的基本尺度，艺术也由此成为审美精神的最高载体。然而中国的艺术从来没有出现过这样的历史景观，艺术在精神文化建构中的作用比起欧洲简直是两重天地!由此才有大教育家、大学者蔡元培在游历欧洲之后的，对中国文化提出的变革之道著名论断：

　　“审美代宗教”。

　　因此从这个意义上讲，中国此前的现当代艺术对待艺术的审美功能的错误的态度是值得进行深入反思的。

　　坎勒的作品就是在这个背景下，出现在中国艺术界，他的作品所展示的完整而深刻的审美的趋势和品格，本身就是对中国现当代艺术在精神文化误区的一个反拨和矫正，当然坎勒并不是一个人，但坎勒的追求在审美性的呈现上，是最为明确而坚定的，也是很富成果的，由此我们有理由相信，承载审美文化历史责任的中国新一代现当代艺术已经呼之欲出!

　　Kan Le is an artist who pays great attention to the taste and quality of life.

　　Among modern-contemporary artists, rarely do I see an artist like him who persistently implants in modern-contemporary art such qualities as delicacy, perfection and profoundness, which are believed to belong to classical cultural spirit, in a convincible manner at both the physical and artistic levels. When faced with Kan Le’s artworks and his attitude towards art, I can’t help but imagine him to be a very successful classicism artist had he been born in the classicist era. Although fate puts him in a modern-contemporary time-space, Kan Le has not become a rejecter. He is a true modernist. In Kan Le I see the mindset that distinguishes him from the other contemporary artists. He is rather calm and introspective. In his spiritual and artistic world, he is undertaking an individualized and innovative transfiguration of the classical culture and aesthetic spirit starting with their structural formations. With Kan Le, life and art are a consolidated whole, which is a life attitude coinciding with Schopenhauer’s aesthetic values.

　　I. In 1996 Kan Le held a solo exhibition at the National Art Museum of China. The paintings on display reflected results of his inquisitive thinking after attending the Xu Bei Hong Oil Painting Training Class at the Central Academy of Fine Arts. Compared with his earlier artworks from Hunan, these were a great step forward. Although I was familiar with and appreciative of his works representative of those young Hunan artists, some new pieces at the NAMC exhibition still impressed me. As the academic host of this exhibition, I wrote an article for him, and made a speech at the opening ceremony. I remember vaguely now that I mentioned two points: 1. the characteristics and meaning of Kan Le’s artistic exploration; 2. the significance and courage of his having a solo show at NAMC at such a young age.

　　So far as I know, the solo exhibition that Kan Le held at the NAMC sixteen years ago was the first among young Hunan artists. Young and proud he might be, his artworks were not immature. Actually his paintings had left a deep impression on his audience and had earned high praise from art colleagues and some authorities in Beijing. For a young artist from outside Beijing, the success was quite impressive. I used to tell many provincial artists, including Kan Le, that Beijing is the ancient capital of culture and is also the cultural and art center of modern China. It is hard for an artist to be successful without any experiences, background or testing in Beijing, and yet it is extremely difficult to pass this checkpoint. I have heard many times discussions at provincial artists’ symposiums about how art critics from Beijing make apropos and sometimes cruel comments. There is a movie from the Soviet Union era titled “Moscow Does Not Believe In Tears”. Beijing is even more so. It does not believe in tears shed by failures. This has always been true since ancient times. There is an interesting Tang story telling of the young Bai Ju Yi’s cordial visit to the then well-known prime minister and poet Gu Kuang. Upon seeing the young Bai Ju Yi, Gu’s first remarks were: “With such high living cost in Chang’An, it must have been hard for Bai.” However, after reading Bai’s famous verses “No prairie fire can destroy the grass, it shoots up again with the spring breeze”, he changed his remarks to: “With such talent as this, it must not have been hard for Bai.” Such genius, such appreciative eyes. As the story has it that Bai Ju Yi’s fame as a poet went way up above that of Gu Kuang. This story has been told and retold through generations and has become a classic tale about talent and fate.

　　In fact, it is not over exaggeration if Kan Le’s success at the NMAC is regarded as early blooming. As I know about his talent, I once expected him to take this advantage and pursue his art career in Beijing, but Kan Le was a man of responsibility and filial duty. He had his parents to tend to and a wife and kid to take care of. One could not live only for art. Kan Le chose to go back to his hometown in Hunan. He dropped a word upon leaving: he would come back to Beijing as soon as his family duties are straightened out.

　　Over a decade has passed. During the years in Hunan, Kan Le continued his art endeavor while tending his family responsibilities. I kept hearing good news from him in Beijing. His artworks won silver medal at the National Exhibition; he was appointed chairman of the local fine art association and dean of the department at his university; his family was well and happy. After hearing all this, I couldn’t help but exclaim: What a perfectionist he is! He strives for perfection not only in art, but in family life, in personal relationships, in family roles and in friendship as well.

　　Indeed, Kan Le kept his word and came to Beijing again. First he stayed as a visiting scholar at the Central Academy of Fine Arts for one year, and then he became one of the drifting artists in a rented studio in Songzhuang.

　　II. Years of exploration and studies in Beijing have led Kan Le’s art up to a new status.

　　Substantially, the perfectionism and spiritual perseverance in Kan Le’s nature entail his near crazy pursuance for the ontology of his painting language. If an artist could be as persistent as this, hardly any academic studies and analyses are necessary. I can only attribute this to the artistic gift born with him. The gift is both of perception and of ability. The series of new paintings that Kan did in Beijing, the “Over There”, “Illusions”, “Big Mansions Series”, “Cruiser” and “the Devine Boat Project”, etc., have all achieved the delicacy and thoroughness in expression and nobility. The ontological depth of language and form in his paintings touches my nerves ends frequently. In the mean time, however, Kan Le’s expression is keen and fresh, to such an extent that I have every reason to believe that the keenest parts of his language and spirit are reacting to each other. His painting brush is integrating the mind, the spirit and the perception.

　　In addition, Kan’s artworks also give a sense of profoundness and mystical appeal. It is neither weird nor illusionary. It appears to be leading us to the reality brightened by his mind’s light.

　　In terms of expression, Kan Le can be regarded as one of the contemporary artists who first introduced new media to artistic expression. Early at the solo show in NAMC more than a decade ago, some of his paintings already had a strong visual attraction. Kan Le has named them “Watercolors on glass card paper”. Actually they are not so much watercolors as art forms evolved from elements of the watercolor art. They no longer maintain much character of watercolors. Compared with traditional watercolors, Kan Le’s “Watercolors on glass card paper” are much stronger and heavier in visual effect. Today although Kan Le’s artworks have been transplanted from the “glass card paper” to the oil canvas, he extends the use of his expressional method and language from the “glass card paper” paintings to his new paintings and renders them with such expressive force as has attracted the eye of his fellow artists and art critics. Kan Le’s way of expression has an idiolectic character in today’s art realm, and therefore can be defined as contemporary art by academic categorization.

　　III. The pursuit for spiritual perfection has enabled Kan Le to stick to the aesthetic ideology and principles with his artworks. This perseverance is purely out of humanity. It is not a copy of any ideological trend or fashion.

　　The contemporary and modern art movement that originated in the West eventually resulted in a much disputed issue known as the so-called “the end of art”. At the beginning of the last century, Western authorities in art theory had pointed it out, but the word “end” actually refers to the termination of the mission that classical art had been carrying within itself. Barnett Newman stated in 1948: “the impulse of modern art is the desire to destroy what is beautiful. This is done through the utter negation of any relationship between art and beauty. Ever since Duchamp’s Fountain makes its appearance, art seems to have become ‘philosophy in a vivid form’. This is in effect “Hegel’s philosophy of history amazingly visualized in Duchamp’s artwork.””(Arthur Danto “The End of Art”)

　　Any artist with a bit of judging ability in the European cultural context would be sure to believe in the reasonableness of Arthur Danto’s theory. But this is a western context. If we apply it rigidly to China and draw a simple conclusion that aesthetics in China should also be terminated, we are making a foolish mistake! The reason is simple. During the post-renaissance period in Europe, aesthetics had become the basic cultural standards and art the utmost embodiment of aesthetic spirit, whereas in Chinese history there has never been such a magnificent view. The role that art plays here in the construction of spiritual culture can by no means be compared with that in Europe. Hence was made the famous argument on the transformation of Chinese culture, “Aesthetic education as a substitute for Religion” by Cai Yuan Pei, the eminent educator and scholar, after his trip across the European continent.

　　Accordingly, the misconception previously held by the Chinese people towards the aesthetic function of art calls for in-depth reflection.

　　It is under such condition that Kan Le’s art emerge onto China’s art stage. The integrated and profound aesthetic tendency and quality revealed in his artworks are themselves a backwash and revision of the spiritual and cultural misconception towards China’s modern-contemporary art. Of course, Kan Le is not alone in this endeavor. However, the aesthetic embodiment of his artistic pursuance is undoubtedly the most explicit and determined and the most fruitful as well. We have reason to believe that a new generation of modern-contemporary art that carries with it the historical responsibility of enhancing aesthetic values has set on its way!