MCLC: Ai Weiwei: wonderful dissident, terrible artist (5,6)

[Denton, Kirk]

MCLC LIST
From: paulmanfredi <manfrepr at plu.edu>
Subject: Ai Weiwei: wonderful dissident, terrible artist (5)
**************************************************************

What has long intrigued me about Ai as provocateur, which I think is the
best way to see his work either as artist or as dissident, is that he
seems genuinely fearless. The clear examples are his constant challenges
to Beijing (among other) authorities, whether they derive from be
art-related, politically-motivated, or, more commonly, perfectly blended
activities. The less obvious examples, though, are often more interesting,
as with the 2010 interview with CNN
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyAeLmN_UjA) wherein Ai proclaims (in
English) that China has no philosophy, and no humanity. On that occasion I
found myself wondering if he might not actually be mocking his
interviewer. After all, he can't really mean that, right?

Regardless, I was pleased with Perl's review, mostly because I'd yet to
see a single critical word about Ai in English-language press, and this
fit that bill and then some. Strangely, this also provokes a somewhat
defensive response from those of us in the field, myself included, who are
quick to point out that Ai's artistic work in China remains clearly more
relevant than derivative. Obviously, the very idea that his work is
derivative begins in an historically informed and global context, where
his status ("influence") as artist withers in the face of his heroic, even
cinematic stand against the faceless regime. And of course, as Lucas
observes, to get into the particulars of the dissent is more than most
readers of the New York Times, Guardian, or CNN, are willing to do. But
the media game is where, again, I think Ai has been concentrating his
efforts since at least 2008, when the Olympics gave him direct access to a
global platform. Indeed, this inclination to celebrity goes back to the
days in  New York, when he and many who now populate the contemporary
Chinese cultural elite (image of Feng Xiaogang sitting on top of a taxi
cab comes to mind) were dreaming up their somewhat impossible futures.

So my issue with Perl's review perhaps comes down to the phrase "pleads
his case in art museums." I wonder, in fact, if that's actually Ai
pleading, or is it instead some battery of curators and art directors, who
are perhaps better targets for Perl's critique than a contemporary Chinese
artist making his way, albeit willingly, in a veritable mine field of
political and aesthetic explosives day after day. What Ai actually cares
about is not Perl (or us), but the people who surround him, and this is
perhaps the best thing that can be said about him.

Paul

====================================================

From: Ian Johnson <iandjohnson at gmail.com>
Subject: Ai Weiwei: wonderful dissident, terrible artist (5)

Before bashing Perl too much, consider that he fits a clear pattern:
unbiased, professional art critics (i.e. people who aren't selling or
showing his work in their galleries/museums, etc) are much more ambivalent
about Ai as an artist than people like us who are China people first and
foremost.

A few years ago I saw some of his works with a couple of prominent
Berlin artists who said, well, that's all fine but it's clearly derivative
and if he weren't a Chinese dissident no one would pay much attention to
it. This was a bit harsh but a softer variant of it began entering the
mainstream media last year, to wit the gentle but fairly negative reviews
in the NYT and the New Yorker last year:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/arts/design/ai-weiwei-survey-in-washingto
n.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

And

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/artworld/2012/10/22/121022craw_artwor
ld_schjeldahl

Perl's views are more sharply drawn than these other two (not
surprising, given that TNR is an opinion magazine and these publications
tend to have more sharply drawn viewpoints than more general-interest
publications like the Times or New Yorker). But Perl's views don't strike
me as outside those of many professional art critics. We in the China
field just haven't heard too many of them because most of the writing
about Ai has been done by China-based journalists and others more
interested in his courageous politics than his creations. Many critics are
also understandably reticent to criticize a person who so obviously
represents a good cause--sort of like criticizing Mother Theresa's
theology (although that happened eventually).

Personally, I find it healthy. If Ai is a serious artist instead of a
celebrity, then his work has to stand up to international competition and
scrutiny. Otherwise it's another condescending "for China" phenomenon--for
China it's avant-garde; for China it's interesting.

Ian