In the clefts of the rock,
in the hiding places on the mountainside
(Song of songs 2:14a)

年初疫情悄然來到！生活隨著政策的限制而被動的「息交絕遊」。山居日子本來簡單因此也不必作太多調整，但死亡信息一波波的如惡浪湧入，生死似乎只有一線之隔。平安己非常態，身心的煎熬如影隨形，直到疫情末期才更清楚的體認到聖徒藏身之處就是主耶穌自己。衪所承諾的陪伴早己無微不至的降臨在暗夜之時。這幾件作品正是欣然感恩的寫照！

Unexpectedly, the outbreak of Covid-19 began in January 2020 and it running on to July here in Taiwan. Following the injunction of the government, my life was forced to be solitary. Though my days in this rugged hillside are simple and no re-engineering is needed, but the waves of deathful news swept over me one after another grew into a total nightmare. Peace is no longer a certainty and there is only a hairbreadth between life and death. When the pandemic was waning, I finally realized that Jesus Himself is the shelter of all saints. His faithful promise of protection is so meticulous in time of the darkest hour. These works utter my full voice of joyfulness and gratitude！

20-04,70x70cm(25號)_壓克力帆布

20-05,55x110cm(30號)_壓克力帆布

20-06,55x110cm(30號)_壓克力帆布

20-07,55x110cm(30號)_壓克力帆布

20-08,55x110cm(30號)_壓克力帆布

20-09, 160x240cmx2-壓克力帆布

隱基底有生命之泉也是安全的庇護所。除了豐饒的物資供應之外，遍佈的天然洞穴也給大衛絕佳的保障。隱基底是上帝全能全在保守的表徵、現今 世局混亂中唯一的依靠。謹以這些作品來表達感恩！

The spring of water in En-Gedi is life-sustaining and the cliffy caves are safe-guarding. It became fortresses for David when he hid from Saul. To Christians, En-Gedi is a symbol of God’s omnipotent and omnipresent harbor. Jesus, the mighty Rock, is my sole salvation in this chaotic world. He provides for me a home within a weary land. To express my thankfulness, I portrayed the rocky land with reverence to show the refreshment and encouragement found in Him amidst the “wilderness of life.”

19-01, 240x160cm x3

19-02, 61x51cm

19-03, 101.5×76.5cm

20-01, 160x240cm, Mixed media on canvas

20-02, 70x210cm, Mixed media on canvas

20-03, 240x160cmx2, Mixed media on canvas

大衛在逃避掃羅追殺時經過了艱險荒涼的猶大曠野來到了死海邊的隱基底—他的庇護所和生命之泉。在此，心力交瘁的大衛終於得到安頓。隱基底之於大衛是獨一的美好与供應的表記。

所羅門的《雅歌》寫到：「我以我的良人為一棵鳳仙花，在隱基底葡萄園中」。隱基底不但有豐饒的葡萄園，更有香味濃郁的黃、橙或白色的鳳仙花作為園子絕佳的保護牆。良人遠播的馨香隱喻了守護、安頓与愉悅。

上帝透過環境，破碎了我的驕傲，並教導我如何依靠衪。在困境中來到上帝面前得以進入心靈安歇之處。雅歌裡的鳳仙花正是預表了基督給信徒全備的愛与保護—-在聖靈裡得著潔淨、自由与救贖。

When David was trying to escape from the vindictive king Saul, he passed through the desolate and stark wildness of Judea and found the oasis of Ein Gedi for refreshment and protection. To David, Ein Gedi came to stands out as God’s unfailing love and endless provision.

Solomon wrote in his 《Song of Songs》:” My beloved is to me a cluster of henna blossoms.” Henna was grown as a hedgerow around vineyards to hold soil against wind and to protect from starving animals. So, a “beloved” would imply the Lord who defends, shelters, and delights while His widely influential fragrance carries to a distance.

God cut my pride through every dimension of life on my spiritual pilgrimage and taught me how to rely on Him in peace. To me, the henna blossom is a realization of the cleansing, freeing, and redeeming Truth of Spirit.

In this exhibition, I present some non-painterly works and to omit its title intentionally. This is to avoid hints that would bring any association to the audience and with such close and intimate communication one might unveil the concealed subtleties abundantly. Hope such aesthetic experience can arouse the alternative potentiality of the audience.

潛質的發微

貝爾(Clive Bell,1881-1964) 於 1914年在英國出版了《ART》，其中第24章提出了「藝術乃有意義之形式」(Art as significant form ) 的論述。在他，藝術品作作爲審美的標的若不能激起「美感」就應被逐出「藝術的自治國度」(1)之外。此前康汀斯基於1912年在德國的《藍騎士》發表了「關於形式問題」 (Über die Formfrage) 強調了藝術形式的精神內涵(Soul of the form) 。他們一個在理論上提示了欣賞的原則；一個着眼於創作的根源，其英雄所見都同時指向「精神性」的核心範疇。這種「巧合」或許正是廿世紀初葉歐洲的政經與文化氛圍使然。更有趣的是藝術史上兩位抽象畫的先驅蒙德里安與康汀斯基都曾受感於布拉瓦茨基夫人(Helena Blavatsky)所倡導的通神論(Theosophy)。通神論者認爲藝術家們過去所追求的是「表面的真實」而因此遮蔽了「内在的真實」，所以藝術家應當揚棄對短暫現象的描摹而追求事物的純粹本質。這種帶著濃濃宗教色彩的神祕學説在當時已擴散甚廣以致許多人都深信人可以從有形的物質狀態「神化」到純粹的精神狀態。因此康汀斯基在文章的開場就直言：「到了命定的時刻，這種必然性已臻成熟」。對於他的理論建構，康氏是用了全然的直覺跳躍而非縝密的邏輯思考。他認爲：創造性的精神不僅是被遮蔽在物質的背後也同時隱藏在物質之中。他所揭櫫的精神內涵正是貝爾所強調「有意義的形式」之所本。本此，以物質形式呈現的藝術品只是精神內涵的載體，它若不能直指核心就變得毫無意義。然而內在精神如何顯發於物質形式之上呢？物質形式主動的「顯發」(Narrate) 其精神内涵早爲實證主義者所否定,而精神内涵在物質形式中被動的「激發」(Provoke) 了觀者的內在感情則是貝爾常常點明的。本此，揭開作品藝術美的按鈕應是存在於各個欣賞者的心理。

由於康汀斯基與貝爾都同時切斷了作品與自然的臍帶。欣賞這類沒有可供辨認形象的純粹作品不論是「抽象」(Abstraction) (2) 或是「非形象」(N0n-objective) (3) 都是極端個人化而沒有客觀標準的。嚴格的説，它甚至連可通約的最大值(commensurability)都不可得。因此去做説明或企圖去了解都成了難題，就連康氏也坦承：「這些穩藏的精神能了解的人不多」。了解是立基於作者與觀者的共鳴(Resonance) ，但共鳴的基礎之難得者至矣。所幸到了H.G. Gadamer 的手中將詮釋學定位爲一種有關理解的本體論。他認爲藝術品的意義不僅僅是創作者的原意，更重要的是觀賞者對該作品的理解意義。這種意義經由以語言爲媒介的傳遞與擴充形成了一個無限的過程。美國學者 E.D.Hirsch Jr. 在其1967年發表的「解釋的有效性」 (Validity in Interpretation )中把作者以系列符號的確定表達定義為 Meaning，而把作品與某人、某系統、某情境之間的變化關係定義為 Significance。至此，精神內涵的拓展隨著時間的推移有了倍數的增長。然而這種自由也可能被擴張到無邊無際。從極僵化的限制到絶對的自由彷彿一艘出港的小船航向茫茫的大海，沒有羅盤的定位則難免有觸礁的可能。在藝術品的欣賞上，貝爾也否定了經驗與知識的必要性。他說：＂我們不需要把生活經驗帶進作品的欣賞中也不需要相關於作品理念及事務方面的知識，不需要熟悉作品要表達的情感。藝術把我們從人的行動世界帶入昇華的美境。就在這一刻，我們被隔離在人慾，期望之外，同時我們的記憶也被捆鎖。此時我們被提升到生命不息的川流之上」。我並不排除這種天才型的靈敏心靈但對普羅大眾而言那畢境是些特例。對我而言，這只是欣賞初階的一個純主觀感受階段，如同禪師所指出的「見山是山」(4)。而美術史所建構的理論以及個別佳作所匯總而成的品味典範也是揭發作品內涵所需修習的。知識有可能導致一時的「見山不是山」，但終究這是進入「見山又是山」的必經之途。

這次展覽我刻意選擇了最沒有「繪畫性」的作品並略去了標题及任何可能引發聯想的暗示，為的是讓作品直接「激發」觀者而使作品幽微的内涵得以無礙的進入人心。但願這種纯粹的美感經驗或能開啓觀者某種另類的潛能。
註：

(1) Clive Bell 認爲藝術無關生活狀態與社群關係。它是一個自治的國度(Autonomy) 排除了有暗示或資訊性的「描述繪畫」、心理或歷史性的「肖像畫」、地誌學作品、說明或故事性的圖式、以及各種圖解、圖案或插圖。舉凡不能引發審美的感動的都在排除之列。

(2) 第一種抽象方法是從自然形象抽離或重組的「合理再構造」。

(3) 第二種抽象方法是以繪畫的基本元素作「主觀再創造」

(4)《指月錄》卷二十八。

見山是山…見山不是山…見山仍是山

  (林勤霖)

Unveiling the concealed subtlety

In 1914 Clive Bell published 《Art》in England. He delivered the idea of “Art as significant form” in chapter 24. He excluded those works that produce no aesthetic emotion from the autonomy of art. (1) Before this event, W. Kandinsky issued＂Über die Formfrage＂in 《Der Blaue Reiter, 1912》in Germany. He granted that the “soul of form” is the pivot of an artwork. Bell pointed out the principle of appreciation theoretically while Kandinsky indicated the very root of creation. Their great minds both pinpointed to the core of spirituality. Maybe the politico-economical and cultural atmosphere of the 20-century in Europe fashioned this coincidence. By further study I found with interest that the forerunners of abstraction—W. Kandinsky and P. Mondrian once indulged in＂Theosophy＂founded by Helena Blavatsky . Theosophists deemed the“external form＂once artists pursued as a black veil to conceal the＂inner truth.＂So, artists should quit following the transient exterior surface and entering the spiritual realm to search the essence of matter . Such mysteriously religious impact strode toward the public finally. Many believed that the sheer spiritual state can be achieved through ”transcendental laws.＂Mirroring this modishness, Kandinsky declared in the beginning of the said essay:＂At the appointed time, necessities become ripe.＂He reached this conclusion by a kind of intuitive leap rather than by meticulously logical thought. He emphasized that the Creative Spirit is not only hidden behind matter, but also concealed within matter. The spirituality which he highlighted is the very source of the ”Significant form＂of Bell. Now, we can see the artworks in material form are nothing but the vehicle of the soul. So, the artworks are worthless if it does not pivot on the spirituality. But how can the material form carry the spirituality is another problem. The narration of the material form has already denied by the Empiricist and Bell pointed out that the aesthetic emotion of the audience is provoked by the spirituality dwells in works of art. So, the button to unveil the artistic beauty is inside the heart of the audience.

Because Kandinsky and Bell have cut off the connection between artworks and Nature, so artworks that not symbolize the visible world are extremely personalized. As a result, objective criteria and even commensurability are hard to set both in Abstract (2) or Non-objective (3) works. So, it is difficult to understand or to explain for such. Kandinsky admitted that the veiling of the Spirit in matter is often so dense that there are generally few people who can see through it. In my viewpoint, comprehension is based on the resonance between sender and receiver. To reach a perfect resemblance is almost impossible in a way. Thanks to H. G. Gadamer for his resolution. According to his theory, the meaning of an artwork can be extended as the viewer legitimately interprets the work. So, the derived meaning can be infinite through such chain process of reflecting interpretations. The American theorist E.D. Hirsch jr. defined Gadamer’s idea of extended meaning as “significance” in his treatise <Validity in Interpretation, 1967>. With the expansion of “meaning,” the cultural growth which has been accelerated by mind-storming is forming a huge pyramid of knowledge. But such a once-bound freedom would possibly expand to an extent that it is like a vast ocean while someone trying to row across it. How dangerous it is if there is no compass available. On the issue of art appreciation, Bell denied the necessity of having experience and knowledge. He stressed:” To appreciate a work of art we need bring with us nothing from life, no knowledge of its ideas and affairs, no familiarity with its emotions. Art transports us from the world of man’s activity to a world of aesthetic exaltation. For a moment we are shut off from human interests; our anticipations and memories are arrested; we are lifted above the stream of life.” I would admit that having such sensitive genius is possible, but such subtle comprehension is not for the public. To me, this is only the first step of the journey of art appreciation as the Zen master mentioned: “A mountain seen is a mountain being.”(見山是山)(4) Meantime, the well-constructed theories and collection of master pieces deserve close scrutiny. Although it might make the second stage as “a mountain observed is no mountain being,” (見山不是山) but this is an access to reach the state of “a mountain perceived remains a mountain being.”(見山仍是山)

In this exhibition, I present some non-painterly works and to omit its title intentionally. This is to avoid hints that would bring any association to the audience and with such close and intimate communication one might unveil the concealed subtleties abundantly. Hope such aesthetic experience can arouse the alternative potentiality of the audience. .

Footnotes:

*(1)Bell insisted that Art is independent of life and social relations. He believed descriptive paintings, portraits of psychological and historical value, topographical works, pictures that tell stories and suggest situations, and illustrations of all sorts are not genuine art.

*(2) “Abstraction” is to abstract the favored part(s) or to eliminate the irrelevant details to shape a “reasonable re-formation.”

*(3) ” Non-objective” or “Non-figurative” is to construct painting elements independently to develop a “subjective re-creation.”

*(4) A Zen saying: A mountain seen is a mountain being, a mountain observed is no mountain being, a mountain perceived remains a mountain being

                                                                           By Lin, Chin-Lin

This series is a spiritual record of my searching with regard to eternal life and heavenly city.
To keep a closer relationship with God is important in my twilight years.

Even much debate has raged over this narrative poem. But I see God’s overwhelming love and an idealized picture with purity and sacredness.

16-01   80x140cm

16-02   80x140cm

16-3   80x(120+40) cm

16-4   80x(120+40)cm

16-5  80x(40+120)cm

16-6  80x(40+40+40)cm

16-07  90x(40+130)cm

16-08  90x(40+130)cm

16-09  90x(40+130)cm

16-10   90x(40+130)cm

 16-11   90x(130+90)cm

16-12   90x(40+130)cm

16-13   90x(40+130)cm

16-14  90x(40+130)cm

16-15  90x(40+130)cm

16-16  90x(40+130)cm

PL15-24,120x200cm

PL-15-03,70x200cm

PL-26,70x200cm

PL15-27,70x200cm

PL15-04,80x200cm

PL15-02,70x150cm

PL15-01,60x150cm

PL15-21,90x90cm

PL15-17,90x90cm

PL15-15,90x90cm

PL15-16,90x90cm

PL15-20,90x90cm

PL-19,90x90cm

PL15-18,90x90cm

PL15-12,60x80cm

PL15-14,60x80cm

PL15-10,40x80cm

PL15-09,40x80cm

PL-15-08,40x80cm

PL15-07,40x80cm

PL15-05,80x40cm

PL15-11,80x60cm

PL15-13,80x60cm

PL15-23,200x120cm

PL15-22,200x120cm

PL15-06,80x40cmx2

2014-16,10P




2014-17,10P




2014-18,6F

2014-19,6F

2014-01,85x85cm







2014-03,10P




2014-04,10P




2014-05,10P

2014-06,6F

2014-07,6F

2014-08,6F

2014-09,6F

2014-10,6F

2014-11,6F

2014-12,6F

2014-13,10P

2014-14,10P

14-20 95x185cm

14-21-95x185cm

13-03, 60 x 93 cm

13-39, 84 x 84 cm

13-38, 84 x 84 cm

13-37, 40 x 47 cm

13-34, 41 x 53 cm

13-35, 65 x 91 cm

13-36, 65 x 91 cm

13-33, 53 x 41 cm

13-32, 53 x 41 cm

13-31, 53 x 41 cm

13-28, 53 x 41 cm

13-29, 53 x 41 cm

13-30, 53 x 41 cm

13-26, 41 x 53 cm

13-25, 27 x 35 cm

13-24, 27 x 35 cm

13-21, 34 x 27 cm

13-22, 35 x 27 cm

13-23, 35 x 27 cm

13-20, 35 x 27 cm

13-19, 35 x 27 cm

13-18, 35 x 27 cm

13-15, 41 x 35 cm

13-16, 35 x 27 cm

13-17, 35 x 27 cm

13-14, 35 x 41 cm

13-13, 53 x 41 cm

13-12, 53 x 41 cm

13-09, 95 x 90 cm

13-10, 95 x 90 cm

13-11, 53 x 91 cm

13-08, 90 x 30 cm

13-07, 90 x 60 cm

13-06, 90 x 60 cm

13-04, 45 x 79 cm

13-05, 30 x 75 cm

13-02, 60 x 93 cm

13-01, 60 x 93 cm

13-40, 116 x 45 cm

印象中他過去那些點描的作品雖然已經脫離了「寫景」，但他那些慘澹經營的鑿痕再再都顯示出討好視覺的意圖。當畫作不再僅是刺激感官的問題時，偏重於心靈探索的「東方式」抽象應運而生。（這類作品不單只是東方藝術家所獨有因此不能名之為「東方」的抽象）它們不涉科學或哲學的知識（形的範疇）而重超乎時空內在性格的生命陶鑄（象的範疇）。如此使得欣賞之門由目視轉向神遇。或許正是由於這種感官的退位。有許多論者即以「禪」來概括吳熙吉的作品。對我而言，那只是一種順應自然、信手拈來的從容：狂放揮洒而沒有流氣，明艷照人而沒有俗氣。我不懂「禪」，但我相信刻意的經營或是強解都已遠離禪的機與理了。蘇東坡臨終時面對維琳方丈和錢濟明的「著力」提醒，他最後的四字真言「著力即差」彰顯了他是真正明心悟道的人。極有可能吳熙吉是從「對微觀與宏觀的相通性」領悟了「著力即差」的道理。他的作品由遠觀的「畫雲」翻轉成近炙的「入雲」。入雲的結果就是「忘形」。之後畫者自證自明的直觀將「偶然」合法化為「必然」。過程中他在大塊的渲染下以另類工具的揮灑而驚喜連連。這種自動性的「無為」與子瞻先生之所晤若合符節。只是這種好景有時而窮。如何適時注入潛意識所主導的「有為」（廣義的自動）可能是他未來的必經之途吧！特此祝福！ 2009.9.28

繪畫是一個由眼而心、由心而手的連續過程。其中用心的程度也是影響作品的重要指標。「遺貌取神」歷來都是中國藝術的高標。簡言之，就是以心眼替代肉眼。「遺貌」須要心的覺醒與勇氣。北歐神話中的大神 Wotan 的行徑即一顯例。而「取神」由心智的質地來決定強度。由賴威嚴近作所呈現的一種以心御物的自得看來，「心」已然躍居統攝全局的地位了。那些疏宕不拘的構圖和燥潤適中的筆觸絕對不僅僅是技巧的問題而已。據我所知由於他近年來的素心潛居：讀書、思索、寫作與教學已結成一條堅實的「精神食物鏈」。豐足的養份支撐著他在藝術創作上的穩健躍進。

建構作品基本上只是一種視覺（非物理）上的加減法。每一筆的更動都由心來引導而作出選擇。就在停筆的那一刻，所有的選擇加總起來就呈現出畫家全人的內涵。他曾自述道﹕「在創作初期是以澎湃的激情揮灑。隨後以靜的思考來解決後續的問題。」這種行徑正與奧國藝術史家Ernest Gombrich 所揭示的 make and match若合符節。通常第一筆（或階段）的make是無意識的「偶然呈現」而後續的match是經過思考後的「必然表現」。在賴威嚴的畫中雖然所謂的澎湃的激情揮灑已經無從辨認，但可以理解的是那些初期的痕跡已經沉沒在他思考之後的結構之下。那些被淹沒的是重要的，因為它們是過去式的「指引動機」同時也是現在式的「支撐強度」。這種探索正是藝術家挖掘無限多可能之所寄。人類對色彩有一種本能的「後象作用」。研究者發現：某種顏色可以固定的喚起另一種顏色。而藝術家也有類似的「後象作用」。只是它不單是源於先天的本能同時也受惠於後天的涵養。因此，match是本於這種因人而異的「後象作用」。畫家作畫時有如兵家用兵。蓋兵無常陣。為將之道全憑臨陣審勢而決機。賴威嚴就是用這種方法來展現所有的哲思、詩情與熱忱。

這幾年在書信中我開始注意到他的書寫風格——-一種不可名狀的書體。既無擔夫爭道的剛勁更無公孫大娘的銳氣。我戲稱它是「枯藤老樹體」。通常他在建構作品時常將某些抽離的物象轉換成符號。而這些符號正合了他的書法氣韻。一般的西畫家極少碰觸書法。而賴威嚴從少年時期即開始臨摹晉唐法帖並進而直追宋人書家的行態和有清一代書家的恣意率性。他所受惠於書法者是間接且經過轉化的。這種轉化比較像二戰後的某幾位書法表現的抽象畫家。他們都同樣的將書法從表義的範疇脫離出來而達到造型上的自由。（西方人有不得不然的理由而對我們似乎更難！）不同的是書法只是作為西方畫家的「觸媒」卻是賴威嚴的「主劑」。總的說來，他的風格是奠基在他沉穩內斂的性格以及後天的心智陶養之上。作品所彰顯的正是這種溫雅的氣質。在技巧上他運用偏鋒的平行移動與上下的提頓在高黏稠的油彩推助下產生了一種「澀」的味道。同時他也巧妙的吸納了字帖上的所謂「刻拓之病」而發展出一種「破」的表情。此外，在刀筆層層的堆砌中，他常有意無意的留下先前的創作痕跡，使觀賞者從材質的重疊中感受到動人的時空感而成就了一種「透」的精微。

人類心靈的內在需要是所有行為的趨動力。藝術家所最關心的就是將深植於內心的能量灌注在作品上。本此，賴威嚴為了這次展出秉精誠之心奮力的一擊無疑的將留下一頁最動人的篇章。