Zhang Peili in Venice
June 1999
Photo by Robert Bernell

Francesca Dal Lago: As a participating artist in this year's Venice Biennale, can you tell me your general impression of the Chinese art exhibited in the show?

Zhang Peili: Firstly, the number of participating Chinese artists is larger than ever before. One interesting thing that Harald Szeemann has done, is not treat Chinese art as a closed group. In exhibiting artists from China in various sections of the Biennale the individual characteristics of their work have been highlighted alongside the rest of the art.  In general, I think Chinese artists have been given a fair treatment,  and the choice of works has been quite representative of the latest trends. Of course,  from a specialist's point of view you would have some problems with the selection, but in general - compared with previous Biennales,  and also considering the curator's realistic limitations - I still think this year offers a quite good choice.  As I said, an improvement is in the fact that here the tendency to group or . nationalizing. the art of China has not been emphasized.

FDL: As an artist who has taken part in 1993 Biennale (the 45th) could you tell me what differences you have noticed between showing then and now.?

ZPL: An immediate difference is the shift in artistic medium: the 1993 Biennale focused on painting,  and in particular China's Political Pop and Cynical Realism. The language of the artworks exhibited in that show was quite even,  with certain works being very similar to each other. By exhibiting them all together,  and separated from the rest of the exhibition, their similarities appeared even stronger. This time the styles used by Chinese artists are quite varied and the works are exhibited amongst the other participants in the exhibition. This allows Chinese works to establish a sort of dialogue as far as language is concerned. Certainly the curator could not possibly forget the social and cultural background of these works,  and their special character, but he has transformed it more into a question of language difference, not cultural difference.  In the 1993 edition there was a large gap between Chinese art and the rest of the exhibition: in that it appeared as if Chinese artists were talking to each other, as in an internal dialogue. In this Biennale we do not find the usual . endangered species attitude. Where Chinese artists are treated as panda bears in a zoo, i.e. special cases: there is more equality, there is the possibility of dialogue with the international art world. In this Biennale the number of Chinese artists is quite large, but apparently none of the works were chosen for their very strong political ideologies or for some stereotypical themes in their work.  

FDL: What do you think about the growing gap that exists between art produced in the mainland and that which is produced by mainland-born artists living abroad. Maybe for an international public there is apparently not so much difference between these two groups, but their concepts, their language, the issues they are concerned with are very different. Do you agree?

ZPL: Of course there is a very big difference between artists residing in  China and those outside. In China ,  artists generally tend to stress their personal living experiences. Of course, these bear some social and individual elements, but they are directly connected with the everyday aspects of life.  For Chinese artists working abroad, the scope generally tends to be much larger. Some  become involved in topics such as: Chinese philosophy, traditional forms of artistic expression historical anecdotes,  or examining Eastern philosophy,  so  as to discuss the possibility of a relationship between Chinese and Western cultures. This is,  I think,  quite different from what artists in the mainland attempt to do.  

As far as the differences in artistic language,  Chinese artists living outside the country- at least those who are now most successful in the Western cultural sphere - tend to use forms of expressions that are progressively more in common with each other.  In China, the difference between each artist can still be quite broad, their connection still loose, they still possess a certain individual character. I am not saying this is good or bad, but it seems to me that mainland artists generally maintain more distinct forms of expression, while Chinese artists living in the West tend not to. Nonetheless,  I'm not clear as to what factors have caused them to grow progressively so close in their artistic language.

As far as materials and media are concerned, many artists in China probably do not have the same working conditions or the same
possibilities, as those outside, and their connection with space and the manipulation of materials is simpler and more direct. This is perhaps, one reason why a Chinese critic living in  Europe has said to me that works of mainland Chinese artists tends to look more like  . student's homework. . He may be referring to  mainland artist' s using space and materials in ways that are seemingly not as vast, or  strong, perhaps less definite.

FDL: As an artist from the mainland who has traveled a lot and participated in many international exhibitions, do you think  that an
attempt by Chinese expatriate artists to discuss through their art  a possible dialogue with Western culture  is successful ? Do you think they  have succeeded in establishing  such a channel of communication?

ZPL: In the current cultural climate, you could say this strategy appears quite successful, but I do not know at what level  one gauges the  "success"  we are talking about. In fact there is still a quite basic ignorance of China and Chinese culture on the part of the Western art world.  It's easier to accept works which are quite conceptualized, such as those dealing with traditional culture or Eastern philosophy. On the other hand, works discussing themes directly related to the reality of life in China can not be easily understood  or have the same immediacy,  since this public lacks a deep understanding of China's daily life. Still, I think,  it is a question of time: for as knowledge of art from China increases,  it will be harder to deal with philosophical and esoteric themes and to avoid discussing topics which are directly connected with China's real life experiences. Nor do I know how deep such a dialogue with Western art can go. I think all artists need to invest some part of their  personal experiences in their art so to make a real difference, to create an impact. I doubt that there can be a long-term dialogue just based on very conceptualized  subject
Matters.

FDL:  Do you then think that in the works of expatriate Chinese artists we can't recognize any degree of personal experience?

ZPL: Certainly,  there is a level of personal experience in what they are doing, but I think it's not very immediate, it is more indirect and conceptualized. It is something like a memory, a remembrance, in some case it is derived from reading books. I think the most direct element is that they live in the West and that they experience directly what it means to  negotiate between cultures. Of course this is very different from living in China. I do not mean to express a judgment here, what I mean is that we have to look of the ways in which this is turned into an artistic language.

FDL:  How do you think this latest Venice Biennale has had or will have an impact vis-à-vis  the position of Chinese art at an international level?

ZPL: As far as Chinese art is concerned, I think this is all just temporary. What eventually will come out are interesting works or
interesting artists, whether or not they are Chinese,  and despite their cultural background.  First we always have to look at whether the art is good, and then we can look at its background. If the work is not interesting, there is no question of looking at where it comes out from, it is just not interesting art.  I think the large interest obtained by Chinese art is also short term, before there was nothing, now there is a factor of novelty that counts.  Nobody would find it strange if there were, let's say, twenty American or twenty French artists. Because it is quite a new phenomenon, everybody noticed the presence of twenty Chinese. In the case of other countries the public would not look at the numbers but whether or not there are good works. Where the artists come
from, it is not important.

[Interview conducted in Bolzano,  on  June 16 1999]

 

Zhang Peili
"Just for you"
1999
Video installation with 10 VCR monitors and 10 channels
1999 Biennale Installation View

Zhang Peili
"Just for you"
1999
Video installation with 10 VCR monitors and 10 channels
1999 Biennale Installation View

Zhang Peili
"Uncertain Pleasure" 1996
video installation with 12 monitors and 4 channels
1999 Biennale
Installation View

 

Zhang Peili
"Uncertain Pleasure" 1996
video installation with 12 monitors and 4 channels
1999 Biennale Installation View



Detail 1

Detail 2

Detail 3

Detail 4

Detail 5

Detail 6

 

Zhang Peili
"Flesh Pink and Gray" 1992
360 x 200 cm
Oil on canvas
1993 Biennale Installation View

 

Zhang Peili
"Purple and Gray"
1992
600 x 200 cm
Oil on canvas
1993 Biennale Installation View

Other Works by Zhang Peili

Zhang Peili
"Eating"
(Installation View)
1997
Video Installation Collection of New York Museum of Modern Art

 

Zhang Peili
"Eating"
(video still)
1997
Video Installation
Collection of New
York Museum of Modern Art

 

Zhang Peili
"Eating"
(video still)
1997
Video Installation Collection of New York Museum of Modern Art

 

Zhang Peili
"Eating"
(video still)
1997
Video Installation Collection of New York Museum of Modern Art