文／張乃文

一塊骨頭要如何連接到精神的存在？當然在此不是特別指向自然存在的哪塊骨頭，此處的一塊骨頭的說法只是隱喻性的，指向具有生命塑造形象特質的物件。尤其是藝術家生產出的藝術品，是否具有成為的可能或如何取得生命意象的可能？乃至，作為藝術品的雕塑體本身是否具有自在自為的存有可能。一塊骨頭如何是藝術精神的存在。這樣的命題其實在回應黑格爾「精神存在是一塊骨頭」的嘲諷性說法，作為此次創作論述的開始。

黑格爾在論及顱相學時，所提出「精神的存在是一塊骨頭」的辯證出發，將無意識的頭骨視為精神的現實性之物的荒謬。 在現實世界，藉由骷髏頭像的形象想像而生產隱喻生命精神面向的表現圖像相當普遍。或許大部分時間骷髏頭的符號性指向了死亡、恐懼、邪惡…的負面意識，但其反向藉由死亡後殘存的存在事實，作為朝向對正面精神面向的抗拒符號，卻是能引起所有人對此反向意識明顯感知的存在方式。而在這正反思辨的縫隙之間，藝術有一種吸納、超越兩者的狀態出現，也就是將其轉化為美感的超然處理，一種藝術特有感知的獨立性從中出現。這是作為創作者的空想嗎？裡面牽涉到了怎樣的問題？我藉由相對的回問：一塊骨頭如何是精神的存在？此似乎難以達成的想像，作為此次的創作方法的思考開端，嘗試找回藝術創作的精神回返路徑的方法論。

此處的我所引申的「一塊骨頭」，不在解釋顱相學中所指稱為精神現實性的頭骨，而是試圖藉由這辯證的反思中，想像擴延出一種精神塑造的可能，因此，此處的「一塊骨頭」是作為一種物性的生命化概念加以討論，恰巧的2017年大陸習近平主席禁止維尼熊事件，我以作品虛擬維尼熊顱骨宣告維尼之死，進入了《一塊骨頭如何是精神的存在？》的思考。

隨後，開啟了作品〈普羅米修斯到女媧的一口氣〉的雕塑體生命塑造工程，此作品是這次展覽歷經最長時間過程完成的，包含了相當數量的石膏塑像，他們似乎展現出類似的規格，然而在其變動中我刻意壓抑形式的複雜性，對比中以聚焦於雕塑形式美學的感性軸線的理性觀看，我將結果經由橫列式展呈，過程回應我對於經典的思考到反動、美學立場的重新思考到雕塑主體美學的超越性本質等等的問題經歷。

黑格爾罷黜掉頭骨作為精神的現實物的過程，在於頭骨要作為精神性存在，從事實推論上犯了明顯因果關係時序上的謬誤。但是，當其認為頭骨無法作為精神塑造的事實，卻給了我雕塑本身具有高於精神的有意識塑造的可能性提了意外的可能暗示。

By Chang Nai-Wen

How can a bone be connected to the being of the spirit? Of course, here we are not specifically referring to bones that exist in nature; rather, here we are speaking metaphorically, in reference to things whose image qualities are shaped by life. Especially, do artworks produced by artists have the potential for becoming, or how can the possibilities of living impressions be obtained? Or even, can a sculpture itself, as a work of art, have an easy existence of its own. How is a bone a manifestation of the being of the artistic spirit? These topics are actually ironic expressions of Hegel’s phrase “the spirit is a bone,” which can serve as a start to this creative statement.

When approaching the topic of phrenology, Hegel began with the dialectic “the spirit is a bone,” seeing the absurdity of a skull without consciousness as an actual object of the spirit. In the real world, the use of skull imagery as a metaphorical expression of aspects of the spirit is quite common. Perhaps most of the time skull symbolism refers to death, fear, evil and other such negative consciousness. However, the opposite corollary, using the actual remnant existence after death as a symbol of resistance to the positive spiritual aspect, can be a way to direct people to clearly perceive this reverse consciousness. And between the cracks of these positive and negative lines of thought, a state emerges in which the artist both takes in and transcends the two in the form of dispassionate treatment by transforming them into beauty, as art’s particular perception of independence emerges. Is this the fantasy of a creator? What kind of issues are involved? I respond with an equivocal answer: How is a Bone the Being of the Spirit? As the starting point for considering a creative approach to this exhibition, this seemingly unattainable imagination is an attempt to arrive at a methodology for the spiritual return path of artistic creation.

Here, by invoking “the bone” I am not explaining how the skull is referred to as the reality of the spirit in phrenology. Instead, it is an attempt to imagine and expand the possibilities of spiritual formation through this dialectical reflection. Consequently, here “the bone” is discussed as a living concept of a type of physicality. Just as my virtual Pooh Bear’s skull declared Winnie the Pooh’s death following PRC President Xi Jinping’s 2017 ban of Winnie the Pooh, as a means to approach the consideration of “How is a Bone the Being of the Spirit?”

From here, I embarked upon the project of shaping the life of a sculpture with the work From Prometheus to Nüwa – One Breath. This work took the longest to complete out of everything in this exhibition, including a fairly large number of plaster sculptures. On the surface they appear to exhibit similar specifications; however, amidst the variation, I deliberately toned down the formal complexity, so as to focus among the contrasts on the rational viewing of the emotional axis of sculpture’s aesthetics, and presented the outcome in a horizontal arrangement. This process echoed my experiences with classical thinking, as well as reconsideration of reactionary and aesthetic standpoints, and the transcendent nature of the subjective aesthetics of sculpture

Over the course of his rejection of the skull as an actual representation of the spirit, by treating the skull as spiritual existence Hegel made an obvious mistake of putting the cart before the horse. Nevertheless, in his assertion that the skull cannot shape the spirit, he unexpectedly hinted to my sculptures about the possibilities for consciously shaping even more elevated than the spirit.