龔鵬程對話海外學者第一百零九期：在后現代情境中，被技術統治的人類社會，只有強化交談、重建溝通倫理，才能獲得文化新生的力量。這不是誰的理論，而是每個人都應實踐的活動。龔鵬程先生遊走世界，并曾主持過“世界漢學研究中心”。我們會陸續推出“龔鵬程對話海外學者”系列文章，請他對話一些學界有意義的靈魂。范圍不局限于漢學，會涉及多種學科。以期深山長谷之水，四面而出。

佩吉·費蘭教授（Professor Peggy Phelan）

美國斯坦福大學藝術教授

龔鵬程教授：您好。您是美國著名的女權主義學者，但可能“女權主義學者”也只是一個標簽，或您觀察事物的一個角度。您更主要的活動或觀察領域可能是表演，您也是國際表演藝術研究的創始人之一，擔任過紐約大學、斯坦福大學的戲劇和表演研究系主任。您寫的《藝術與女權主義》一書中展示了近 100 位女權主義藝術家的作品。您可以談一談這本書，以及您喜歡最喜歡的女權藝術家嗎？

佩吉·費蘭教授：龔教授，您好。這個問題無異于問我最喜歡的朋友是誰！我無法對她們進行排名。我只想說，即使有些人比其他人更受人尊敬，書中所有的藝術家都對女性主義藝術史做出了杰出貢獻。而那些接受上的差異，很大程度上揭示了藝術史的運作方式。在1970 年代可能被忽視的作品如果在幾十年后再次出現在人們的視野中，依舊可以成為一項重大而有見地的貢獻。

例如，漢娜·威爾克(Hannah Wilke) 的藝術作品，最初因其描述身體積極性、宣揚女性的自主性，尤其是性能力方面的自主性而受到贊譽。而現在在經歷艾滋病、新冠大流行和其他全球性健康災難之后，威爾克以攝影表演和記錄她的癌癥治療和死亡的繪畫為主的晚期作品，又被認為是更重要的貢獻。

同樣，像福斯·林戈爾德(Faith Ringgold) 這樣自 1970 年代以來就一直在探索種族與女權主義的交織性的藝術家，似乎變得更加重要。因為多元交織性 (intersectionality) 已經成為當今理解身份及其各種表達的主導概念。

在撰寫《藝術和女權主義》的調查文章時，我希望在鞏固三十年的女權主義藝術和思想的同時，再找出一些藝術和女權主義之間尚未充分探索的部分。我討論了喬治亞·奧基夫(Georgia O'Keeffe)對色彩的迷戀，并提到她對扭轉西方哲學習慣——自然承載著人類情感與欲望的嘗試。

奧基夫認為，反而是花朵的顏色可能會教會我們應該去感受什么。我認為我們仍然缺乏準確的詞匯去描繪情感，單單由繪畫記錄下來的色彩，就已可以教導許多關于我們不同情感生活的光影、色調和層疊。

That question is akin to asking me who my favorite friends are! I cannot rank them. I will simply say that the artists in the book have all made significant contributions to the history of feminist art, although some are more celebrated than others. These differences in reception reveal quite a lot about the way in which art history works. Something that might be overlooked in the 1970s re-emerges as a significant and perspicacious contribution decades later. For example, Hannah Wilke’s art was originally celebrated for its body positivity; her work was praised for celebrating women’s agency, especially in terms of sexual power. But now, in the wake of AIDS, the Covid-19 pandemic and other global health disasters, Wilke’s beautiful late work, primarily photographic performance and drawing documenting her cancer treatment and death, might prove to be her more consequential contribution. Similarly, an artist such as Faith Ringgold who has been exploring the intersection of race and feminism since the 1970s seems ever more crucial as intersectionality becomes the dominant concept for understanding identity and its varied expressions today.

In writing the survey essay for Art and Feminism, I was trying both to consolidate thirty years of feminist art and thought and to suggest some aspects of the conjunction between art and feminism that had not been fully explored.I discussed Georgia O’Keeffe’s fascination with color and mentioned her attempt to reverse the usual habit of western philosophy – the assumption that nature carries human feeling and desire. O’Keeffe suggested, on the contrary, that the color of flowers might teach us what we feel. I still think we lack a precise vocabulary for feeling and I think the literal act of touching color recorded by painting has much to teach us about the shades, tones and cliffs of our mutative emotional lives.

龔鵬程教授：您曾研究過人們的自拍行為，并發表過相關學術文章。您可否談一談自拍和藝術兩者之間的關系？

佩吉·費蘭教授：照相手機的技術確實改變了攝影，除了讓大多數手機用戶也可以成為藝術家之外，照相手機還衍生出了自拍。特別是對于女權主義藝術來說，這是具有變革意義的。

長期以來，藝術界，包括廣告和電影，對“美麗女人”的看法都非常狹隘。自拍能夠以指數增長的速率來擴大這一類別：老年女性、胖女人，無論什么膚色，身體是否殘缺，所有女性都能制作出令人著迷的照片，以更加寬廣的胸懷去擁抱可以被定義為“美麗的女人” 的人。

近年來，跨性別藝術家也致力于在視覺和哲學上啟發我們對“女人”的理解。藝術家卡西爾斯(Cassils) 是這一領域最有成就的人之一。我在這個網站(https://feministartcoalition.org/essays-list/peggy-phelan)里介紹過她的作品。同時，還有西蒙娜·利(Simone Leigh)和埃莉諾·安蒂恩(Eleanor Antin)的作品。

簡而言之，自拍技術拓寬了審美范疇的范圍，也擴大了可以更廣泛地接觸到全球影像生產和流通的人數。通過這種技術，削弱了一些可以已經更廣泛地控制了我們與“偉大藝術”的關系的機構和個人的力量。雖然說當代藝術已經民主化有點言過其實，但我認為自拍有助于降低它更精英化的傾向。

The technology of the camera phone has transformed photography absolutely. In addition to making most cell phone users artists, the camera phone has birthed the selfie. For feminist art in particular, this has been transformative. For far too long the art world, and here I include advertising and film, has had a very narrow view of “a beautiful woman.” Selfies have helped expand that category exponentially – old women, fat women, women of every face and ability have produced mesmerizing photos that have opened our eyes to a much more radical embrace of what and who counts as “a beautiful woman.” Additionally, trans artists in recent years have also worked to open up our understanding of “woman,” both visually and philosophically. The artist Cassils is one of the most accomplished in this area. I have written about her work, as well as the work of Simone Leigh and Eleanor Antin, here:https://feministartcoalition.org/essays-list/peggy-phelan.

In brief then, the technology of the selfie has broadened the range of aesthetic categories and it has also expanded the number of people who have access to the global production and circulation of images more broadly. In this way, technology has helped taper the power of some institutions and people who have controlled our relationship to ‘great art’ more broadly. While it would be too much to say that contemporary art has now become a democracy, I think the selfie has helped bring down some of its more elitist tendencies.

龔鵬程教授：您最近的研究工作涉及媒體、攝影和視覺藝術。在過去十年中，我們見證了許多杰出的技術進步，例如通過機器學習開發社交媒體或圖像處理方法。藝術界是如何應對技術的快速變化的？

佩吉·費蘭教授：數字圖像的全球流通也帶來了新的挑戰，尤其是在大數據及其使用方面。新冠大流行也使得藝術博物館和畫廊在努力迅速將他們的藏品數字化。但如何訪問這些檔案，仍然很棘手，“以數據呈現藝術”的概念在以前幾乎沒有出現過。

對于繪畫、雕塑、面料藝術和陶瓷來說，數字屏幕的平坦性限制并扭曲了藝術表面的觸感，尤其是與分層和面料特異性效果相關的觸感。

我認為，當我們開始接受初級藝術形式的數字替代品時，我們需要看到技術領域的更多創新以確保藝術的觸覺方面不會完全消失。

我還認為無論是策展類還是學術類的培訓項目，都需要更加深入地了解和參與數字圖像帶來的影響。

那些專門評估數字藝術方法，一般都被視為“附加品”，而不是作為藝術歷史知識的基礎。大多數參觀博物館的游客，都已對從熒幕中欣賞藝術品非常熟悉，并經常為像杰克遜·波洛克在畫布上添加釘子或煙頭這種畫作而感到震撼。有的博物館觀眾會走馬觀花地欣賞一圈，卻會缺少仔細和深入地觀察其中錯綜復雜的構圖的耐心。

此外，有很多問題也是真實存在的，比如面部識別軟件有存在種族偏見，還有監控和隱私的丟失問題。我很欣賞特雷弗·帕格倫(Trevor Paglen)和勞拉·普瓦特拉(Laura Poitras)在這方面的工作，并期待在不久的將來會有更多的當代藝術家繼續探索這些問題。

也就是說，我認為一些藝術家在創作他們的作品時做的調研過程上太過了。我是學術的倡導者，但當我看藝術時，我并不一定想閱讀梳理大量的文件和數據。

偉大的藝術既可以擴展邏輯和理性，也可以挑戰因果邏輯的權威性和確定性。但我今天看到的大部分藝術都在不質疑因果關系的情況下恢復和推崇它們。我不斷看到關于無人機、戰爭、饑餓、氣候災難或任何其它真正重要的全球危機的“數據可視化”。藝術在這些問題上絕對可以起到至關重要的作用。但是，在最好的情況下，藝術追求的應該是與新聞或學術不同的邏輯。

當我觀看藝術作品時，我希望得到的不僅僅是理性的自我。我想要感到驚訝、感動、不安和啟發，而不是“知情”。

The global circulation of digital images has created new struggles, especially in relation to large data and its uses. And the Covid-19 pandemic encouraged a rapid effort by art museums and galleries to digitize their collections. But issues of access to these archives remain tricky and the scale of ‘art as data’ has barely come into view. For painting, sculpture, fabric art and ceramics, the tactility of the surface, especially in relation to layering and textile-specific effects, the flatness of the digital screen limits and distorts the art. I think we will see more innovation in the tech space to ensure that the haptic aspect of art is not totally lost as we embrace digital surrogates for primary art forms.

I also think training programs, both curatorial and scholarly, will need to attend much more deeply with the consequences of digital images. There are specific methods involved in assessing digital art that have been treated as “add-ons,” rather than as fundamental to art historical knowledge. Most museum goers have become very familiar with looking at art on screen and are often startled to see that, say, Jackson Pollock’s paintings have nail studs or cigarette butts on the canvas. Other museum viewers have become great at scanning art but sometimes lack the patience to look carefully and deeply at intricate compositions.

Additionally, facial recognition software, for example, seems to have racial bias built into it and problems of surveillance and loss of privacy are genuine. I admire the work of Trevor Paglen and Laura Poitras in this area and expect that these issues will continue to be explored by contemporary artists working across the globe. (Both the Venice and Berlin 20022 Biennales featured a range of this kind of work).

That said, I think some artists are over-doing the research agenda that supports their work.I am an advocate of scholarship but when I am looking at art, I don’t necessarily want to read lots of documents or comb through data. Great art expands logic and rationality; great art challenges causal logic’s authority and certainty. But much of the art I see today recuperates and valorizes causality without questioning it. I keep seeing “visualizations of data” about drones, war, hunger, climate disasters or any number of other genuinely important global crises. Art absolutely has something crucial to add to these issues. But, at its best, art pursues a different logic than journalism or scholarly argument. When I am viewing art, I want to be addressed by more than my rational self. I want to be surprised, moved, disturbed and inspired, rather than “informed.”

龔鵬程教授：作為行為藝術研究專家，您覺得當代行為藝術的哪些趨勢更為有趣？

佩吉·費蘭教授：我很幸運能看到很多精彩的表演！我認為新冠大流行迫使這種現場的藝術重新考慮它真正重要的部分！

自從我們開始重新開放劇院和藝術空間以來，我看到了更多的活力和細微的差別，對我來說，這是現場藝術最重要的方面。

我也很享受欣賞我一直喜歡的藝術家在銀幕上的表演。我希望我們在規劃未來時能夠保留這些作品中的創造力。

我想在這里（簡要）提一些亮點：米格爾·古鐵雷斯(Miguel Gutierrez)：我看他的舞蹈作品很多年了，經常被他的作品所感動。但在大流行期間，他與非舞者的一些對話，特別是他與安娜·塞爾（Anna Sale）在她的“死亡，性和金錢”播客上所進行的一次對話（https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/deathsexmoney/episodes/miguel-gutierrez-death--money?tab=summary），使我更全面地理解了他的藝術：是什么激勵了它，什么阻止了它。我想我會以一種新的方式看待他的編舞。

莎拉·卡梅隆·桑德(Sarah Cameron Sunde)的表演項目《36.5：與大海的持續表演》(36.5: A Durational Performance with the Sea)，她邀請觀眾直接或是以想象的方式站在大海的邊緣，與她一起沉浸在水中。

多年的表演在十二種不同的水體中進行，水的消退和流動隨著時間和溫度而變化。這場表演從早晨第一縷陽光開始，在最后一點陽光褪去時結束。在這大約十二小時里，潮汐完成了從漲潮到退潮的一個完整周期。潮汐周期結束，演出結束；桑德離開水面，我們看到大海也不再是原來的樣子。我認為這是一個微妙而深刻的作品。

最后一個我想要提到的作品是立陶宛三人組麗娜·拉佩利特(Lina Lapelyt?)、魯吉列·巴爾茲齊凱特(Rugil? Barzd?iukait?)和瓦伊瓦·格蘭尼特(Vaiva Grainyt?)創作的歌劇《太陽與海》。這部歌劇在 2019 年獲得威尼斯金獅獎，以其巡回演出的每個地方的氣候變化為重點，對表演不斷進行改編和改善。

這個表演，挑戰了對“現場歌劇”要求的傳統理解。樂團是錄音的而非現場演奏的，表演者也主要都是在躺著的時候唱歌。或許我最喜歡這部歌劇的地方就在于它拒絕謝幕和掌聲的安慰。即使到了觀眾被要求離開的時候，表演者依舊留在舞臺上，半是喃喃自語，半是歌唱，隨著世界尋求終結。

I am lucky enough to see a great deal of wonderful performance! I think that the pandemic forced live art to reconsider what aspects of it really matter! Since we have begun to re-open theatres and art spaces, I see more vitality and more nuance in the alchemy of presence, to me, the most important aspect of live art. I have also enjoyed encountering artists I’ve long loved on stage craft performances for the screen. I hope we can retain some of the creativity in those pieces as we plot the future. Some highlights I will mention (briefly) here:

Miguel Gutierrez: I’ve watched his dance work for many years and have often been moved by it. But during the pandemic, some of his conversations with non-dancers, especially one he did with Anna Sale on her ‘Death, Sex and Money’ podcast --https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/deathsexmoney/episodes/miguel-gutierrez-death-sex-money?tab=summary -- helped me understand his art – what motivates it, what blocks it – more fully. I think I will see his choreography in a new way going forward.

Sarah Cameron Sunde's performance project, 36.5: A Durational Performance with the Sea, invites viewers to stand at the edge of the sea, physically or imaginatively, and immerse ourselves in water with her. A multi-year performance in twelve different bodies of water, the performance stages water ebbing and flowing, as time and temperature transform its matter. These durational acts begin in light and expose the dimming of it. After about twelve hours, the tide completes one full cycle of coming in to shore and receding. At the end of the tide cycle, the performance ends; Sunde leaves the water and we see that the sea no longer appears to be the same. I think this is a subtle and profound piece.

Finally, I will mention the opera Sun and Sea created by the Lithuanian trio, Lina Lapelyt?, Rugil? Barzd?iukait? and Vaiva Grainyt?’s. Winner of the Golden Lion in Venice in 2019, the opera is an ever-evolving piece that focuses on climate change in each of the places it tours. The performance challenges the traditional understanding of what ‘live opera’ requires. The score is taped, not live, and while the performers sing, they mainly do so while they are lying down. Perhaps my favorite thing about this performance is how it refuses the consolations of the curtain call and applause. The audience is asked to file out, but the performers remain, half-murmuring, half-singing as the world seeks its end.

龔鵬程，1956年生于臺北，臺灣師范大學博士，當代著名學者和思想家。著作已出版一百五十多本。

辦有大學、出版社、雜志社、書院等，并規劃城市建設、主題園區等多處。講學于世界各地。并在北京、上海、杭州、臺北、巴黎、日本、澳門等地舉辦過書法展。現為中國孔子博物館名譽館長、臺灣國立東華大學終身榮譽教授、美國龔鵬程基金會主席。