第60期 小制作的艺术家（2009年）
学术主持：邵一 张辽源
主题： 李明 马笑萧 李富春 王欣 王小峰 陆扬 张乐华 李琳 孙慧源 欧文婷 崔绍翰 陈园 黄丽芽 胡筱潇 杨俊岭 戎瑾君 林科 易连 曹澍 邓吉赟 张剑云 冯晨 张大海
新作：孙汉桥 宋永红 徐牧原 佘松 潘微 李玉娟
Issue No. 60(2009)
Theme: A Conversation on the “Small Production”
Academic Host: Shao Yi, Zhang Liaoyuan
A.T: Li Ming, Ma Xiaoxiao, Li Fuchun, Wang Xin, Wang Xiaofeng, Lu Yang, Zhang Lehua, Li Lin, Sun Huiyuan, Ou Wenting, Cui Shaohan, Chen Yuan, Huang Liya, Hu Xiao Xiao, Yang Junling, Xu Jinjun, Lin Ke, Yi Lian, Cao Peng, Deng Jiyun, Zhang Jianyun, Feng Chen, Zhang Dahai
A.N: Sun Hanqiao, Song Yonghong, Xu Muyuan, She Song, Pan Wei, Li Yujuan
关于“小制作”的对话
对话者：邵一、张辽源、付晓东
对话时间：2009年6月
张辽源曾经在《小制作，不要停下》写到“小制作”产生的背景:
“1、杭州缺少的不是好的展览，而是根本就没有展览，哪怕是差的展览，连一个遭人骂的活动都没有；
2、大家都太想出效果，没有热情去组织一般的活动，怕出丑，缺少勇气去做小的想法。想得太多动手极少；
3、太注重展览本身，忽视了活动中相互交流的重要性以及这种交流量的积累所产生的动力和可能性；
4、不要去选择好作品，而是让更多的人参与进来，让最差的想法也找到一个呈现的机会；
5、我们要活泼泼的聚会而非僵硬的展览，更像是去打一场台球。”
针对从2008年8月开始已经持续了八届以杭州和上海的年轻艺术家群体为主要参与对象的“小制作”，我们约“小制作”活动的发起人邵一和张辽源，对于关于“小制作”的种种问题展开了这次对话。
付晓东（以下简称“付”）：“小制作”第一次开始是在什么地方？
邵一（以下简称“邵”）： “小制作”第一次和第二次“烧烤”是在我工作室，第三次是在日月广场。第一次我们通知的人不多，只有十多个人。刚毕业的人也都过来了，先来看了一下，第二次他们就要求来参加。
付：第一次的时候大家的心态是怎样的，到现在八次的活动里，大家的心态有什么变化吗？
邵：变化肯定是有的。这种变化是因为外界有了反应之后，而内部的心态没有什么变化，还是按照“小制作”原来创作的方式在进行。我们一直强调不是在做展览，这是一个聚会，一个交流，在一块玩儿。
张辽源（以下简称“张”）：外界始终存在一种误会，我们绝对不是在刻意制造一种策略，然后回应现在的状态。
邵：这是凑巧。我们第一次做的时候，还没有产生金融危机，刚好第二次、第三次的时候，突然金融危机就来了。“小制作”好像跟金融危机是反着来的。我们不去涉及市场，也不涉及到策展人、展览和画廊。“小制作”只是随便叫的名字，但是后来外界就觉得变成一种固定的模式。这个是一种误解。
付：外界对“小制作”最大的批评来自于什么？
邵：最大的批评是作品的质量，我个人的想法是无所谓。当时讨论过精简人员来提高作品质量，但不是不让别人进来，而是应该把原有自己的东西弄得更好。
付：“小制作”的出现让我想到哈维尔的“自我组织”。自我组织这种民间的非商业、非官方的组织，某些志趣相投的人，在内部发生一些思想的交换，达到对单一文化统治的分裂和反抗。“小制作”具有这种气质，当然目的不一定是这个。比如它针对艺术商业体制化、艺术的权力体制，它对体制有一种无意识的反动，是另外一种方式，成为一个例外。
张：其实所有参加“小制作”的艺术家也有和画廊合作的，像我和画廊就一直都在合作，接受画廊的支持。我当时觉得和画廊的合作还要继续，除此之外我们杭州的朋友之间可以互相玩，玩得很轻松。只要大家能玩得开心，能放松地做东西就够了。
付：如果“小制作”不是展览，那是个什么东西呢？
邵：我不知道是什么东西。我们根本就没想去定义它是什么东西。从我个人的角度出发可能只是一个交流，我们坐下来跟你聊个天，一个聚会，就是这种感觉。比如第二次弄烧烤，主要就是为了强调不要把它当成一个展览。
张：杭州有那么多艺术家，那么多想做东西或者正在做东西的人，但是互相之间很少联系，大家可以一块玩。
付：这个活动进行之后，彼此之间的联系或者说思想的交换更密集了吗？杭州的艺术生态是否多多少少还是被改变一点了。
张：肯定的。像以前我根本不了解“双飞”，但是通过这个事情彼此更加了解。像“双飞”的活动也是越来越多。
邵：我和“双飞”是两个年龄段的人，平时根本就没关系，但现在总是混在一起，包括“黑桃”，原来不可能跟她们有联系的。改变最多的尤其是年轻的这拨人。假如说没有这大半年下来的活动，可能很多人就不会选择留在杭州，就到北京去了。前几年所谓的杭州帮，他们做东西的品味包括平时聊天的品味都是相同的。要是不怎么合拍的话，就很难融到一起。
付：为什么大家都来参加“小制作”呢？
邵：有一些对当代艺术刚刚有些初步了解的人，包括有些以前做创意产业的，都有兴趣要来参加一下。我们没门槛，一个当代艺术的爱好者，没参加过任何展览，他相对来说做的东西比较幼稚，别的地方进不去。“小制作”也并不一定是不成名的人才能参加，成名的人也可以做。
付：展前你们是怎么通知艺术家来参加这个活动呢？
邵：如果非要说是个特点的话，就是平时在做的东西，而不是特意为了“小制”作而定制一个东西，到时候把这个东西拿出来。我们只是定了一个时间，聚在一起，大家把这个东西拿出来看一下。第一次我们是有个名单，大概就是我们认识的人。第二次他们认识的人也来参加。还有就是在网络上发一个消息，很多人知道了就会过来。在杭州有三十多人，第三、第四次人数最多。
张：如果站在一个学术的角度分析它的话，体制的模式来套它，会觉得它很不一样。其实这种不一样也很正常，特别简单，每个人都经历过，以前只能做过小作品，保持它的一种创作状态。我们只是把大家凑到一块，起到一种拉动的作用。
付：“小制作”是否拓展了你们原来对作品的界定？“小制作”或多或少还是会有一些创作上的倾向，比如说日常化的、身边小事的，甚至有贫穷倾向的、低成本的、小规模的。
张：肯定有。比如说我，以前肯定不会想到把这个物品改装一下，总是想到一些大的东西，固定的一种想法。现在很少有人会静下心来看作品。这些全是日常生活中身边的东西，一看就是在家里做的，书啊、纸啊，改装一下，玩一玩。“小制作”是一种更轻松的态度。
邵：“小制作”只是第一次活动的一个命名而已，第二、第三次就没有用，第四、第五次又把它用回来了。我们不是强调一定非要做一个小东西，而是反复强调平时在实验的一个东西，日常当中在做的一个东西，哪怕没有完成，也可以拿出来。有一次一个女研究生问，她应该拿一个什么东西来才符合“小制作”。问题可能也出在我们这里，引起了一些人的误解。这帮人都没钱，只能做一些不花钱的东西。这个倾向是客观上决定的，不是在追求。
付：每次“小制作”之后交流的方式和话题是什么样的？
邵：我们想有一个交流，但每次都不一样。人最多、最正式的一次，也是针对一些个人的作品。“小制作”之前我们不审方案，我不知道张辽源做什么，他也不知道我做什么，但是完了以后对自己的作品有一个阐述，然后针对这个阐释有疑问的互相提一下，这是相对正式的讨论，小范围的讨论多一些。很多次过来参加的人我都不知道是谁。
付：关于“小制作”以后的发展，有可能继续扩大规模，还是集中在杭州？
邵：我们没有一个预期的发展，可能会有一种调整，自然而然吧。
张：我们非常注重每个艺术家的自由身份，每个人过来玩，不代表他就是“小制作”的人或艺术家，每个人都是自由的、随意的，来去自由，没什么限制，更不是什么帮派团体，这一点非常重要。更没有外界想的那么热闹融洽，其实也很平淡的，没什么有意思的事情，真正的交流都在每个团体内部。如果强行给他们戴帽子，这对他们每个小团体的发展是不利的。
A Conversation on the “Small Production”
Conversationists: SHAO Yi, ZHANG Liaoyuan and FU Xiaodong
Date: June 2009
ZHANG Liaoyuan once wrote about the backgrounds for the emergence of the small production in Small Production, Don’t Stop:
“1. Hangzhou’s problem is not the lack of good exhibitions, but rather the utter lack of exhibitions – not even a bad or condemned one;
2. Everyone is too focused on achieving the spectacular, hence the lack of passion for the ordinary, the fear of embarrassment and the lack of courage to be the small one. Too many thoughts yet too little action;
3. Too much attention being attached to the exhibition itself resulted in the neglect of the significance of mutual communication in the activity as well as the dynamics and possibilities accumulated through the communication;
4. Instead of choosing good works, we should bring more and more people to participate, allowing even the worst idea an opportunity to present itself;
5. What we want is not a stiff exhibition but a lively party, like playing billiards.”
I invited SHAO Yi and ZHANG Liaoyuan, the initiators of the small production activity, to participate in this conversation concerning all kinds of problems of the “small production”, which have been held 8 times since Aug 2008, with young artists of Hangzhou and Shanghai as its major participants.
FU Xiaodong (hereinafter referred to as “FU”): Where did the small production first begin?
SHAO Yi (hereinafter referred to as “SHAO”): The first time and the second “barbecue” of the “small production” were in my studio, and the third time in Riyue Square. We didn’t notify a lot of people for the first one, just 10 plus. People who just graduated also joined to have a look and requested to participate in the second one.
FU: What was the first timers’ state of mind? And did that state of mind change after 8 times?
SHAO: It surely changed, due to the reactions of the outer world, though the inner minds stayed unchanged, continuing to carry out the original mode of creation of the small production. We have always emphasized that it was not an exhibition, but rather a party, communication, a shared joy.
ZHANG Liaoyuan (hereinafter referred to as “ZHANG”): The outer world has a misunderstanding about us. We were in no way meaning to create a kind of strategy to respond to the current situation.
SHAO: It was mere coincidence. The financial crisis was no where to be seen the first time we did it, but it struck all of a sudden during the second and third times. The small production seems to be anti financial crisis. We don’t deal with the market, nor curators, exhibitions and galleries. The small production was just a random name, which developed to be a fixed pattern in the eyes of the outer world. That’s a misunderstanding.
FU: What’s the biggest criticism from the outer world on the small production?
SHAO: The biggest criticism is on the quality of the works. As far as I’m concerned, I don’t care. We have discussed about elevating the quality of the works through cutting down the participants, which doesn’t equal shutting down the door, but rather making better of the stuff we already have.
FU: The emergence of the small production reminds me of Xavier’s “self organization” – a non-commercial non-official civil organization for people sharing the same interests to exchange some thoughts within, in order to achieve the disintegration and defiance against the domination of mono-culture. This temperament of small production is not necessarily its intent. For instance, it’s against the commercial systemization and power system of the art. Its unconscious rebellion against the system is another mode, thus an exception.
ZHANG: In fact all the artists participating in the small production also collaborated with galleries, for instance, I have long been collaborating with and supported by the gallery. I thought the collaboration with galleries would continue. Besides, we could play with each other with relaxation in Hangzhou. As long as we can enjoy ourselves and do our stuff relaxed, that’s enough.
FU: If the small production is not an exhibition, then what is it?
SHAO: I don’t know what it is. We never thought about giving it a definition. As far as I’m concerned, it may well be a communication. We sit down and have a chat, a party, that’s the feeling. For example, the main reason to hold a barbecue at the second time is trying to emphasize to not treat it as an exhibition.
ZHANG: With so many artists in Hangzhou, so many people who are thinking of doing things or doing things but rarely getting in touch with each other, this offered a chance for us to play together.
FU: After the event, did your contacts or exchange of thoughts become more frequent? Was the artistic ecology of Hangzhou changed a bit more or less?
ZHANG: That’s for sure. I didn’t know a thing about Flying Together Art Group, but we gained a lot of knowledge and understanding through it. Also there are more and more activities by Flying Together Art Group.
SHAO: I don’t belong to the generation of Flying Together Art Group, and not connected to them in anyway, but we hang out all the time now, together with Spade Art Group , with whom I also had no possibility to associate. Ones who changed most are the young ones. Without those activities, many of them would choose to leave Hangzhou for Beijing. The so-called Hangzhou Clan of a couple of years ago shared same tastes in their works as well as in chatting. If not, it will be hard for them to mingle together.
FU: Why did they all participate in the small production?
SHAO: Some people, who were on the threshold of knowing the contemporary art, including some in the business of creative ideas, were interested in taking part in it. We don’t have a threshold. Suppose there’s a fan of the contemporary art, he hasn’t been to any exhibition, his works are rather naive and he couldn’t get into anywhere else. The small production is not the un-famous only, famous people could also take part in it.
FU: How did you notify the artists to participate in this activity before the exhibition?
SHAO: If any trait, it should be the works we do everyday, rather than the especially custom-made works for the small production and showing them at the exhibition. We just set up a date and come together to look at the works we did. The first time we had a list, most of whom were people we knew. The second time, people they knew also took part. What’s more, we posted a message on the net, which drew a lot of people. We got 30 plus here in Hangzhou. The third and fourth times we had the most participants.
ZHANG: If analyzed from an academic perspective and examined in the mode of system, it shows quite a difference, which is in fact very normal and especially simple, something everyone has experienced – being able to do only small works before, we kept on this state of creation. We just pulled us together.
FU: Did the small production expand your original definition of the works? The small production more or less possesses some creative tendencies, for examples, of daily lives, trivial matters, even poverty, low-cost and small size.
ZHANG: Definitely. Take me for instance, it would never occur to me to modify this thing, instead I would always put my thought on something big, a fixed idea. Very few people now can calm down and view works. These are all things around you in daily lives. One glance and one would discover they are home-made, books, paper, with some modification for fun. The small production is a more relaxed attitude.
SHAO: The small production was just a name for the first activity, which we didn’t use for the second and third times but changed it back in the fourth and fifth. We are not emphasizing that you have to make a small thing, but rather that anything, be it something in the experiment or something being made in daily lives, can be presented, even unfinished. Once a female post-graduate student asked what she could bring to qualify as a small production. The problem may lie with us too, for we had aroused some misunderstandings. These people don’t have much money, thus they could only make something that wouldn’t cost. This tendency is decided by objectivity rather than our pursuit.
FU: How did you communicate after each small production? And what were the topics?
SHAO: We wanted to have a communication, but every time was different. The most formal one with most people was focused on some personal works. We didn’t review any plan before the small production. I didn’t know what ZHANG Liaoyuan did, nor did he me. But we each would have an illustration of one’s own works, based on which questions would be brought up to each other. It’s a relatively formal discussion, carried out more in small ranges. People could have participated a lot of times, I still wouldn’t know their names.
FU: About the development of the small production, is it possible to expand its size or is it still concentrated in Hangzhou?
SHAO: We don’t have a predicted development, maybe some sort of modification. Just let it be.
ZHANG: We attach great importance to the free identity of every artist. Everyone came here to play, but that didn’t mean he belongs to the small production. Everyone is free to come and go with no limitation, let alone gangs or clans, which is very important. On the other hand, it wasn’t as exciting and harmonious as the outer world imagined. In fact it was quite flat and dull with nothing interesting. The real communication took place inside each group. If we try to force a label on them, it would be detrimental to the development of each small group.