<span class="Apple-style-span" style="WORD-SPACING: 0px; FONT: 12px Tahoma; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; orphans: 2; widows: 2; webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; webkit-text-stroke-width: 0;"><div style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px; BORDER-BOTTOM: #535353 1px solid;"></div><p></p><a name="128278"></a><div style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px; BORDER-BOTTOM: #535353 1px solid;"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" align="center" border="0" style="TABLE-LAYOUT: fixed; WORD-WRAP: break-word;"><tbody><tr class="h"><td height="25"><div class="user1"><div class="user2"><span id="layer1" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"><br/></td></tr><tr><td><img src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/level/8.gif" alt=""/>
<br/>级别: <font color="#555555">*</font><br/>精华: <font color="#008000"><b>*</b></font><br/>发帖: <font color="#008000"><b>*</b></font><br/>威望: <font color="#984b98"><b>* 点</b></font><br/>嘿币: <font color="#984b98"><b>* 元</b></font><br/>贡献: <font color="#ff0000"><b>* 值</b></font><br/>在线时间小时)<br/>注册时间:*<br/>最后登录:* </td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div></td><td align="right" height="28"><div class="fontother"> </div></td></tr><tr class="tr1"><th class="r_one" valign="top" colspan="2" height="100%" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 15px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 80%; PADDING-TOP: 5px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="tpc_content">浏览Ann Hamilton 170张图片的方法<br/> <br/>文／劳伦斯•阿尔伯（Lawrence Raab）<br/><br/>1 这是什么？这是一张嘴。但这是一张什么样的嘴？是谁的嘴？是人的嘴吗？或者是一具死尸的嘴？一个洋娃娃？一尊塑像？ <br/>这些紧闭的嘴里含含糊糊的又哭又闹，又叫又嚷，说的到底是什么东西呢？也可能他们是在默默地微笑？这些嘴没一张都显得神秘而又似乎在表达着什么东西。 <br/>当一个比较抽象的画面出现的时候，我们马上抓住画面中的嘴作为一个参考点。我们可以看到牙齿，还可以看到鼻子的影像，有时还可以看到眼睛。就好像我们在摸索什么东西。 <br/>当某一个画面看起来比较吓人的时候，好多时候都会出现这样的情况，很多这样的画面出现在一起的时候可能更加吓人。这时候就算是答案显而易见的时候，人们也往往会脱口而出：这是什么东西？而表面的图像背后隐藏的又是什么那？ <br/><br/>2 有一个朋友说：它们就像是证据一样，这些证据如果不放在一定的背景之中我们是不会知道如何处置的。在试图解释一张我们只能看清一部分的面孔时遇到的问题使我们想起有时外表时如此容易的迷惑人。我们经常会走得近一点，这样就可以看得更清。但在这里我们已经凑得太近，让人感到难受了。我们希望能够退后一步，这样我们能够看到整个一张脸，整个身体，以及背后得空间。当然这样做是不可能的，即便模糊的视野告诉我们应该调整一下视角，重新找到焦距。这可能成为一种建立背景信息的方法。缺少这种方法的话，我们就更加能够认识到产生的问题，以及我们所处的位置给我们造成的困难。如果这是背景信息的话，整个画面就像是一些碎片，悬浮在空中，没有任何可以驱动它们的动词信息，它们的行为无法体现，它们的思想无法了解。<br/><br/>3 如果这种模糊将某些画面变得抽象的话，这种抽象让人感到很不舒服。相反，它们经常显得正在向你靠近，逐渐移向焦点－但就是没有移动到正确的位置。如果他们显得非常的模糊的话我们不知道如何靠近他们的方法－形状、策略、或者是背景这些可以在模糊的环境中透出图像的含义的东西统统都没有。与简单的混乱和随意的含糊不清不同，模糊也有其自身的价值。模糊意味这一种意图，转而意味这创作者的一种控制。我们希望这个创作者是有计划的，他决定通过抑制一种理解从而透露另一种含义的理解。也可能他希望我们一直保持一种似是而非的感觉。<br/><br/>4 这些是我们在日常生活中捕捉到的画面－可以把它们叫做抓拍－在这些画面中我们追求的是清晰。这些模糊的照片让人感到失望，应该归咎于某些人的失误。假想有这么一个派对，比如说是一个婚礼，每一个人都面带欢笑，每一个人都尽情拥抱。这是的目的就是捕捉到这一刻的场面，什么人在场，他们看起来如何等等。照片的功能是保留其中的主题，而摄影师发挥的是一种机械式的功能－而不是制作一个在其中人人都占有一席之地的照片。 <br/>如果这时摄影师晃动了照相机，这张照片就会成为他的一个失败的表现。其中的模糊不是为了表现应该表现的主题，只是因为摄影师一时不小心而造成的。清晰是固定的，而模糊是移动的，是一瞬间的表现，是摄影师技艺不精的结果。 <br/>当然我们都很熟悉将模糊作为一种特殊处理的艺术效果。通过这种模糊可以将某些事情刻画得更加真实－一个运动员得动作，一个士兵得死去－它得效果远胜过精确的画面。一副照片中飞驰而过的汽车造成的模糊意味着力量和速度，或许还有驾驶员的疯狂（如果我们也将买一辆这样的车的话，我们的感觉会是如何）。一副清晰的照片失去了场景中所有的时间元素，无法表现驾驶员的乐趣，只是将车子固定在所有周围的场景之中。<br/>一副照片中的模糊－不管是一个失误或者是一个特殊的处理－将照片中明显的主题移动到了一边，而让我们意识到摄影师观察事物的行为，以及在多长的时间段之中对事物进行的观察。画面中的模糊可以防止画面于拍摄画面的时间脱离开来。这是一段由动作刻写的文字，这是图像本身所无法包含的，是一个超越相框的连 续的描述，同时也指向一去不返的过去时光。 <br/><br/>5 那我们该怎么处理这些模糊的嘴脸呢？它们不是抓拍的作品，所以不要提抓拍的问题。这些模糊明显是刻意加工的，是为了产生一种模糊的感觉。但是这种氛围和摄影师的视野以及其存在很不协调，于对这些面容的不加雕琢的再现完全不同。 <br/>Ann Hamilton说，这些照片的模糊的程度没有到失去视线的焦距的地步。所以它们在我看来不是由于移动造成的，而更加像是由于远近造成的，由于对焦的不精确造成的。你看到的是一个相机在朝里面移动，或者是朝外面移动，但绝对不是在朝焦点移动。这更加像是在表现一种不完全的记忆。<br/>在某一些基础的层面上，景物脱离了焦距就会变得模糊。但是Hamilton透过了事物的现象指出了之中内在的本质。由急速移动的汽车产生的模糊，运动员甩动的身体－这些都是为了营造一种瞬间的感觉，刻画当时视觉上和感觉上的效果。这些照片没有在我们和时间之间建立起联系，至少不是我们平时所说的那种连续的有生命的时间。前向和后向的移动也是移动，但是于横向的和远离的移动是完全不同的。如果说后一种于描述相联系的话（一件事之后又另一件事），那么前一种则看起来更加内在（越来越近，进入或者出来），也许更加的具有猜测性，更加心理化（记忆和回忆），但是不管怎么说更加难以界定。不是模糊或者迷茫，只是说更加令人不安，就好像陌生的东西刚刚开始变得熟悉，但突然又不熟悉了。<br/><br/>6 当我给我的妻子看了一些不连续的照片之后，我妻子说这是美女与野兽。她说得没错，唇部看起来很美很性感，而其他照片当中破裂的嘴唇和参差不齐的牙齿显得很吓人。这是一个让她自然而然想到的一个故事，一个可以涵盖和解释这一切的故事。如果又合适的背景的话，这些照片完全可以融入到背景中去。 <br/>当然他们并不愿意妥协。但是如果我们最终要控制这些照片的话，我们对其组织，明了，理解的种种要求就成为Hamilton的理论中为了探索和联系而常常提到的各种部分。她的目的不是否定观众对于秩序的爱好，而是要把他们引向更大更有趣的注意目标上去。这种认知的过程可以将对意义本身的思索过程变得至少与发现意义一样有价值。<br/><br/>7 如果说这些照片引发的第一个问题是“这些是什么东西？”的话，那么第二个问题很有可能涉及到这些照片情感上的含义。我们应该如何面对这些我们所假设的－或者是想象的－含义呢？<br/>我们都不自觉的依赖我们观察人们面貌的能力。能够隐藏自己的情感的人只是其中的一大部分。人的脸是很有表现力的，特别是某一些部分，最著名的是眼睛，这是心灵的窗口，自我的一面镜子，在快乐的时候眼睛里会闪现火花，在伤感的时候眼睛会显得没有神采，在喜悦的时候眼睛会放出光芒。看着别人的眼睛，我们觉得我们可以感到他人的感觉。恋人们互相注视，眼睛里反射出的是自己心爱的人，有时恋人们的视野被激动的泪水模糊。有人说：我可以从她的眼睛里看出来。他的眼神出卖了他。或者有人说：他的眼神空洞，熟视无睹，毫无生气。<br/>如果这些照片把注意力集中在眼睛上，那么它们看起来应该是什么样子的呢？我想大概会更加令人舒服，但是在情感上面的紧张感会小一些。当我们把我们的注意力从脸上最有表现力的某一个部分转移到一张不稳定的，令人紧张和焦虑的嘴上的时候，我们很容易会感到有一些手足无措。<br/>归根结底，嘴对我们是如此的重要，它的工作负担也是如此之重。它可以发出声音以供人们交流，虽然我们有时立即会怀疑别人对我们所说的话，转而通过眼神来确认。为了能够明确地进行口头表达，我们必须学习语言。但是通过一个眼神－我们是多么希望仅仅通过一个眼神就可以表达那些令我们难以启齿的含义！在莎士比亚的戏剧中，一见钟情的情节至少在一定的时间之内是不需要插入台词来打断的。在皆大欢喜中的Orlando当有机会和Rosalind说话的时候却变得哑口无言，他对自己说：“激情锁住了我的舌头”。但是Rosalind没有因为他的沉默而怪他，他们互相之间都能看出来对方的感受。 <br/>人的嘴巴会撒谎，会恳求，会忏悔，会说不出话来。而人的眼睛会注视会反射。人的嘴巴可以张开也可以闭上。它可以藏住舌头，以及其他种种复杂的，直接的或者具有寓意的内部组织。人的嘴巴一直延伸到身体内部很深的部分，而眼睛则牢牢地和人的思想向联系。人的嘴巴是一种存在也是一种不存在，时而双唇紧闭，时而嘴巴张开可以看到里面的部分。嘴巴管理着，有时也可能管理得不太好，语言，食物，情色上得快感，还有呼吸，而眼睛只是注视，或者了望，或者干脆闭上。嘴巴是各种不同组织的组合，唇，舌，牙齿，延伸向下的喉管－它们在不同的时候更具需要会来回反复地运动。<br/>嘴巴可以告诉我们谁活着或者谁死了。眼睛可以一直紧紧地闭上，或者一直长时间地注视。但是我们追求的只是人的最后一口气，我们相信的也是人的最后一口气。李尔王对死去的Cordelia说：“如果她的呼吸可以玷污石头的话，她活着还有什么意义？”他让自己的眼睛欺骗自己：“你看见了吗？看她！看！她的嘴唇！/看那里，看！－”<br/><br/>8 我的一个好友告诉我，在他的整个人生之中，人们－特别是女人－觉得有他在场充当听众是一件很压抑的事情，因为他总是用眼睛注视着他们。这表明了一种关心、注意、兴趣、同情。不管是哪一种情感，他注视人们的方式使得人们感受到他的存在－这是一种充满关怀的深深的注视。但是他跟我说“其实我从来不看他们的眼睛，我看的是他们的嘴，我现在就在看着你的嘴。”<br/><br/>9 这本书在我们面前展现了各种不同的嘴，有时可以看到一只眼睛，似乎在提醒我们其实不是关注的对象，这是我们无法理解的一种比喻，至少是我们应该重新考虑的。我的朋友说：“我一直以为我得嘴巴会背叛我，而不是我的眼睛”。<br/><br/>10 我的另外一个朋友还说：“牙齿也是一个问题”。我说：“是哪一方面的问题？”他朝我凑近说：“我不知道”。<br/><br/>11 离奇，有时候我们考虑的是一种特殊的奇怪感觉，似曾相识的感觉。当我们到了一个从来没有到过的地方，而觉得好像来过这个地方，打开一扇门但是却对里面的东西丝毫也不感到好奇。或者突然觉得是不是一个洋娃娃或者一尊雕塑被移动过，或者是不是突然把眼睛张开了。当然在现实之中这是绝对不可能发生的。离奇的事件在“现实”两个字上加上了引号，使我们对于现实产生了怀疑，同时怀疑我们是不是真的了解控制世界的这些规律。<br/>Sigmund 弗洛伊德在1919年写的伟大，浩瀚而又饱受攻击的论文“离奇”，研究了各种相互关联的考虑和定义主体的方法。弗洛伊德认为有一种离奇的感受起源于人们感到陌生又熟悉的那一刻，这时一种认为这些我们应该是知道的，或者曾经知道，或者忘却了，或者被压抑住了的令人不安的感觉。弗洛伊德说：“一种离奇的效果通常是通过去除想象和现实之间的界限来产生的。例如有些东西我们一直认为是我们的想象，但突然在现实中出现，或者当某个符号突然代表了其所代表的事物的所有意义和功能”。<br/>在文学当中一个比较又代表性的离奇现象是突然怀疑某种活的东西是不是真的具有生命，或者某些不应该具有生命的东西实际上是一个木偶－例如一个机器人之类的东西。在文学中，离奇的事情起决于创造一种可以进行解释的不确定感，这种不确定感首先被文学中的角色感受到，然后被读者更加深刻地感受到。如果读者始终不能理解故事的规律是什么（背景是什么，该用什么样的方式来阅读），整个解释过程的顺畅就会受到阻碍。作者的任务是保持这种阻碍的动人之处，最后让人彻底恍然大悟。<br/>这种解释的混乱再次将我们带到了我们对这些照片的最初的感受之中－我们不能确定我们正在看的到底是什么－一个人，一个洋娃娃，还是一尊雕塑，或者是其他的艺术作品。我不知道在这一百多张照片之中，这种心智上的不确定感产生什么样的作用。事实上，尝试写一个系列的照片，而这些照片我本人只见过一小部分，这本身就有一点离奇。我到底是在期待什么？我希望创造什么还是解读什么？但是这种存在于作品本身和观赏者的想象之间的张力本身就是一种很好的策略，它可以创造一种条件，在这种条件之下艺术家渐进式的发现可以在后来被观赏者激活。<br/><br/>12 我太太对我说：“你费这么大的力气想要把它搞清楚？这是什么意思，你现在停下来了。不，不是停下来，而是遇到挫折了。但确切的说又不是挫折。而是其他的什么东西。你觉得他们到底在看什么？他们在什么地方？它们都看起来像是同一刻出现的”。<br/><br/>13描述这些照片制作的过程像是一种背叛，一种去除离奇性的方法。但是最后，我还是觉得对一些事实基本了解可以使这些照片获得一种不同的面貌，这种面貌同样的具有感染力，刺激性，和令人不安。<br/>这些照片里的使斯德哥儿摩Historika Museet天主教堂中的一些中世纪的祭坛用的木雕人像。它们是用一个硬币大小的单片监控摄像头拍摄的作品。用食指和拇指拿住这些人像以后，Hamilton慢慢地用手在人像的嘴部周围移动，并使用一个小型的监控器在旁边观察整个过程。<br/>整个过程本身具有很大的寓意－如铅笔一般细小的摄像机在人像周围的空气中令人无法察觉地慢慢刻写，又像人们想要在书的边角上记下自己的思路时手中拿起的铅笔。手中握的时用来观察嘴部曲线的眼睛。Hamilton不禁在想，这种手部的动作是不是要引诱嘴巴发出声音呢？<br/>最后根据整个拍摄的过程，在胶片中选出这些最终的照片。就像是手在嘴部周围的空间中移动的过程那样，在转过整卷胶片的时候，Hamilton依靠手的节奏来做出最初的决定。整个过程的第一步是“空间上的接近，第二步是时间上的向前转或者向后转”。其中的那些所“包含信息不多不少”的照片就被放大并印刷出来。<br/>我们到底应该把这些称作什么呢？摄影？还是电影胶片的静止？当然，它们两者兼备，但又不完全是其中的任何一个。我们一般意义上的摆姿势然后拍照在这里不适用，就好像在微型的相机在围绕着脸部旋转并将其遮住的时候，眼睛不能透过棱镜看东西，只能看到棱镜旁边的东西。手部的动作建立了一连串的摄像画面。动作将其在实时中表现出来，但是这些动作又掩盖了这些接下来会被发掘出来的单独的相片。<br/>在Camera Lucida中，Roland Barthes这样写道：“我将现代摄影中不可移动的东西映射在过去拍摄的照片上，而构成姿势的是对场面的捕捉”。当摄影开始活动并且成为电影的时候，其内在的精髓－其生命在瞬间的停顿－“开始枯竭”。对于Barthes来说，“摄影就是一些东西在一个小孔之前摆个造型，让后永远地被定格（这是我的感觉），但是在电影中，一些事物在这个小孔之前进行：造型被去掉，取而代之的是一串连续的照片……”Hamilton的照片似乎是介于造型和连续序列之间的一种形式。或者它们自认为与固定的大地完全不同，而是摇摆于造型影像和连续时间影像之间的一种形式。<br/>Hamilton说：“这些照片是为了还原时间，或者在这些不能移动的雕像张展现时间……每一秒钟拍摄三十张照片，每一张照片代表的都是一个独立的时间点，但是这些时刻在我们将结构以及其数码信息拆分出来之前是无法被我们看见的。含义的基础在于分离。”人们也可以说，分离是这些相片的观赏者所具备的条件，其中的一个表现就是人们会问，“这是什么？”在这些相片来源（祭坛用品，历史和叙述）以及整个过程（从录像中截取静止的画面）的特性之间的分离，将观赏者放在了一种令人焦虑和不安，同时又令人好奇和叹为观止的位置上。但是知道了这些木雕，或者知道了这些照片的制作过程之后，人们最终－也是自然而然地－感到与其说是一个彻底的解答还不如说是一个更加复杂的过程。因为有更多的问题产生了，有更深的探索还在等着我们。 <br/><br/>14 Hamilton说：“这个复杂的制作过程可以使人重新审视这些雕像，同时使它们从僵死中恢复生命，让它们发出自己的声音”。当然她不可能真的让它们出声，这样一来它们就可以大呼小叫，说出自己的想法，但是她还是可以提出这种可能性的。<br/>“在一部分雕像中嘴巴使张开的，意思使它们正在说话，”她说，“但是它们还是默默无语。所以它们表达的是一种说话的冲动－说任何可以说的事情－是一种表达含义的冲动”。听不见的东西最终还是听不见，但是这样以来沉默中就注入了生机。这些照片中似乎充满了一种紧迫感，使其难以表达，似乎在眼看就要开口说话之间的这一刻被无限地延长了。模糊的价值就在于其给观赏者施加的压力。里面的迷雾就是其自我的象征，使人产生共鸣但是又令人无法看透。通过这些迷雾，其中的氛围被再现出来。<br/><br/>15 但事实上什么才是“气息”？从一种意义上说就是“表现”，按照韦氏字典上的解释就是：“从某个人或者其周围产生的一种特别的氛围或者是品质”。其中举的例子是：“包含在磅礴的气息之中”。<br/>牛津英语字典的解释显得更加的丰富－是一种从物质中透出的一种细致的散发的气氛，例如血的气息，花的香味等等。但是在世界哲学和文学批评界“气息”一词于Walter Benjamin紧紧联系在一起。Benjamin在他的论文《微型摄影史》中曾经问道：“什么是气息？”然后他又自己回答到：“这是一股时间和空间之中特殊的交织， 是距离的特殊表现和模仿，不管两者之间有多么的接近。在夏日午后休息的时候，在追逐地平线远处的山脉的时候，或者一根树枝在观察者身上投下的影子，直到这一刻，这一时成为它们的外表的一部分的时候之前－这就是所谓的呼吸着山脉的气息，树枝的气息所代表的含义。”<br/>Benjamin在他的抒情诗中回应他自己的问题时说，感受到气息实际上就是连接空间和时间。这一刻，这一时实际上已经成为了山川和树影的表象的一部分。但是Benjamin通过使用代表运动（首先是追踪，然后是呼吸）的片断来定义主题又使事情变得复杂。于追踪相连的是“时间与空间的交织”，然后演变成为检验将事物与其发生的时刻相联系以后产生的结果的过程。这时观察者可以呼吸“山川和树枝的气息”，仿佛它们果真具有生命一般。观赏由此变成了一个创造性的活动，具有物理和生理上的功能－眼睛和嘴一起工作的过程。<br/>对于Benjamin来说，气氛与独特是紧紧相连的。这是经过机械复制以前的艺术作品所特有的，这时艺术仍然具有“目标的权威”。在《机械复制时代的艺术作品》一文中，Benjamin写道：“我们知道，最早期的艺术作品是在仪式上使用的－首先是魔术，然后具有宗教的性质……涉及到其气氛的艺术作品从来没有与仪式分离开来过。”这就是为什么艺术会复杂化为“时间与空间的交织”。当这些照片在其传统之下充分地发挥出其力量的时候，当作为迷信的崇拜对象，它们被赋予了含义以后，就算一个人离它站得再近，也会对其产生一种畏惧感和高不可攀，高高在上的感觉。<br/><br/>16 “在我拍它们的时候，我从没有碰过它们。”Hamilton说，“但是感觉却像是碰到了它们，在抚摸它们。”<br/><br/>17 在斯德哥儿摩的一个祭品的清晰照片可能会非常迷人，但是却显得静止不动。也许很美丽，但是却平淡无奇。事实代替了气氛，每个人都对它伸手可及。<br/>考虑到将这些照片以“再生的方式进行制作”，今儿奇迹般地给了它们生命和声音，我们不禁会想到弗洛伊德. 弗洛伊德说过：“我们对离奇的分析，将我们带入了古老的宇宙万物有灵论，它的论点是世界上到处都有人的灵魂存在…<br/>任何让我们感到离奇的东西，都具备条件激起我们心中残存的万物有灵的精神活动，从而得到它们自身的表达”。这使我想到了照片本身的离奇效果。我们存在的时间要比它们长得多，但是当第一个摄影师将一个人的人像摄入相片的时候，当他看到人像与真人一摸一样，只是尺寸小了一点的时候，他该感到多么吃惊，多么的沮丧啊。这种能力简直是一种魔术。感觉简直是一种可以永远改变世界的活动，事实上它的确改变了世界。Benjamin在他的论文《微型摄影史》中曾经引用Karl Dauthendey描述制作第一张底片的时候的语言说：“第一次看到的时候，我们不相信自己的眼睛……我们看到这些清晰的人像的时候大吃一惊，我们认为这些相片上面小小的人像可以看到我们。”<br/>弗洛伊德在阐述“原始思维”的时候说：“现在，我们克服了这些思想，但是对于我们所相信的东西又不是十分确定，而固有的思想还是残存在我们的脑海中，攻击我们所确认的任何东西。”在这种固有的信仰之中，许多面孔的组合开始抬头，似乎有话要说。但是它们又沉默不语，毕竟它们只不过是照片，毕竟在现实中它们只是用木头制作成的东西。摄像机给它们造成了具有生命的假相，并且恢复了原来用来象征另一个世界的氛围。”<br/><br/>18 Roland Barthes 在他的Camera Lucida中说：在每一副摄影作品中，我们都可以遇到“归来的死者”。以前人们认为－现在还有人认为－死者可以通过某些媒介开口说话。而摄影为死者提供了一个真实而又具有图形特色的媒介。在Ann Hamilton的照片中，从来不具有生命的东西被赋予了生命。在看了这些照片的一部分以后，我们可能真的会怀疑它们到底是不是洋娃娃或者雕塑。知道了被摄的对象也不会使人感到失望。其目的在于表现这些雕塑，而不是欺骗我们自己。知道它们是祭坛上的器具以后，它们表现出另外一种神秘感，其中还带有一丝哀婉－人的灵魂是如何住在这些雕塑中的，为什么人们曾经认为神会通过这些人工制作的东西说话，甚至住在里面，在神消失了以后，现实是如何消失的，气息是如何消散的，而这些雕塑是如何从供奉它们的教堂中移到博物馆中让人欣赏而不是让人信奉的。在Hamilton的照片中那一瞬间，它们又回归到了它们原先在仪式中的存在状态，回到了它们最真实的生命中。<br/><br/><br/>劳伦斯•阿尔伯（Lawrence Raab）著有六本诗集，其中《我们之间互相不了解的事情》（1993）获得国家诗学奖，也是国家图书奖的最终入围作品。《可能的世界》（2000），以及最近的《可见的符号》：《最新作品与诗歌选集》（2003）。现任教于美国马萨诸塞州威廉斯顿威廉大学，教授文学和写作。<br/><br/><br/><br/>EIGHTEEN WAYS OF LOOKING <br/>AT ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY - FOUR PICTURES<br/>BY ANN HAMILTON<br/><br/>Lawrence Raab<br/><br/>1 What is it? A mouth – yes - but what sort of mouth? And whose? A person’s? Or could this be a corpse? Or could this be a corpse? Or a doll? Maybe a statue?<br/>And what would all these mouths, so close-up and blurredout, be saying-crying, whispering, imploring, shrieking? Or smiling silently. So many mouths caught in the act of being mysteriously expressive.<br/>When an image verges on the abstract, we soon catch hold of the mouth as a point of reference. Then we can identify teeth, or the shadow of a nose, sometimes an eye. It’s as if we were trying to figure something out.<br/>And if a certain expression looks alarming, and many do, that still doesn’t account for how disturbing the images appear as a group, which id why “What is it?” feels like the right first question, even when the answer seems obvious. What is it that’s behind what it seems to be?<br/><br/>2 “They’re like evidence,” a friend said,” evidence that without context we don’t know what to do with things.” The difficulty of interpreting a face we’re only partially partially able to see may remind us of how easily appearances can deceive us. Often we move closer how easily appearances can deceive us. Often we move closer to try to see something more clearly. But here we’re already uncomfortably close. We want to step back, look at the whole face, the body, then the space around it, and of course we can’t, though the blur suggests a need to adjust our perspective, and refocus. That would be a way of establishing context. Deprived of it, we’re more aware of the questions that have been raised, and the multiplying difficulties of our position. If this were a text, the pictures would be sentence fragments, suspended in the air, without any verbs to drive them forward, to make their actions apparent, their ideas knowable.<br/><br/>3 When the blur shifts some images toward the abstract, it isn’t a comfortable kind of abstraction. Instead, they always appear to be coming forward into focus – just not far enough. If they’re ambiguous, we don’t know the terms that would make them approachable – the shape, or context in which ambiguity would allow the disclosure of meaning.<br/>Nevertheless, there is value in ambiguity itself, as there isn’t in mere confusion, or careless the control of a creator, someone who , we hope , possesses a plan, and has therefore decided to forestall one kind of understanding in order to reveal another. Or perhaps we are meant to remain always about to understand.<br/><br/>4 In the pictures we take throughout our liver – call them, snapshots – clarity is what we’re after .The blurry photo is a disappointment, somebody’s mistake. Imagine a party, perhaps a wed-ding, everyone smiling, their arms around each other. the aim is to capture that moment, who was there and what they looked like. The picture memorializes the subject, and the photographer serves a mechanical function - mot so much shaping a vision as making sure everyone gets into the frame.<br/>lf the photographer then jiggles the camera the picture becomes the evidence or his error. The blur points mot to the intended subject but to the moment when the photograph was taken. Clarity is fixed, while the blur is a movement, the encoding of the temporal, albeit in this example as clumsiness.<br/>Of course we’re also used to the way blur functions as a designed effect. Through it the truths of certain moments - an athlete in motion, a soldier dying - are conveyed more immediately and effectively than precision, the blur of a moving automobile evokes power and speed, perhaps the exhilaration of the driver (what we would feel if we were to purchase that car).the crisp, detailed photo of the car by itself removes the element of time, the implied narrative of the pleasures of driving, and commits itself wholly to outward appearance.<br/>Blurring in a photograph - either as error or effect - nudges the ostensible subject aside to made us aware of the photographer’s act of looking, and the space in time when that looking took place. The blur prevents the image from separating itself from the moment of its making. It is an inscription of action， which the picture cannot contain，the suggestion of a continuing narrative beyond the frame， as well as a gesture toward the unrecoverable past.<br/><br/>5 What do we do with all these blurred mouths then? They’re not snapshots, and don’t attempt to refer to snapshots. The blur is clearly intentional, and works to create an aura of ambiguity. Yet this aura doesn’t coalesce into a sense an aura of ambiguity, yet this aura doesn’t coalesce into a sense of the photographer’s vision or presence so much as it feels like a kind of uncanny emanation from the faces themselves.<br/>“these images,” Ann Hamilton has said,” aren’t so much blurred as they are out of focus, and so they seem to me less about movement and more about closeness and farness, focus and proximity. What you see is the camera moving toward, or moving away, but never quite into focus, this seems more about memory and recall and incompleteness.”<br/>On some basic level what’s out of focus is blurred. But Hamilton points beyond the fact to the effect. The blur of the speeding car, the falling soldier, the hurtling body of the athlete - all work to conjure up a moment, and what it was like to see, or feel it. These images, on the other hand, don’t allow us access to time, at least mot that sense of ordinary, continuous, livable time. The movement toward and then back is still movement, but registers differently from movement across and away. Lf the latter is associated with narration (one thing after another), the former seems more interior (closer and closer, in and out), perhaps more speculative, more psychological(“memory and recall”), but in any case harder to define. Not confusing or obscure. But troubling, as if the strange were just about to become familiar, then didn’t.<br/><br/>6 “ Beauty and the Beast,” my wife said when l showed her several out – of - sequence shots .she was right: the lips in some looked lovely and sensuous; in others the gaping mouth and ragged teeth were grotesque. it was a story she naturally turned to， a tale that would enclose and explain them。 Given a context， the images could settle into place.<br/>Of course they refuse to comply. But if we must finally fail to control these images, our desires to organize, clarify, and understand are all part of those interpretive impulses Hamilton’s installations frequently invoke in order to question and complicate. Her aim isn’t to reject the viewer’s inclinations toward order, but to call greater and more interested attention to them, such recognitions might then make the process or thinking about meaning at least as valuable as the uncovering Or meaning itself.<br/><br/>7 If ’what is it?’ is the first question provoked by these pictures, the second is likely to have something to do with their emotional content. How should we respond to those feelings we assume - or imagine - are being conveyed?<br/>We all unconsciously rely upon our ability to read peoples’ faces. That some are able to conceal their emotions only proves the general case. The face is expressive, especially parts of it, most famously the eyes - windows on the soul, mirrors of the self, sparkling with pleasure, clouding over with distress, lit up with delight. Looking into the eyes of others we think we can see what they feel lovers gaze deep into each other’s eyes, which reflect the beloved, or well up with a blur or tears. l could see it in her eyes, someone says, his expression gave him away. Or else: his eyes were blank, or blind, or dead.<br/>How would the pictures look if they concentrated on eyes? more comforting, l think, less emotionally fraught. There’s something disorienting in switching our attention from the feature of the face we assume possesses revelatory power to the unstable, difficult, worrisome mouth.<br/>After all, the mouth does so much for us, and works so hard. Lt allows us to utter communicable noises, even if we quickly learn to distrust what we’re told, and turn to the eyes for unimpeded confirmation. To speak clearly requires mastering language. But a look - how we yearn to believe that a mere look might convey the truth we’re too tongue-tied to articulate! In Shakespeare’s comedies love at first sight avoids, at least for a while, the difficult intercession of speech. Orlando in As You Like It is struck dumb when he has the chance to speak to Rosalind.” What passion hangs these weights upon my tongue?” he asks himself. But Rosalind doesn’t blame him for his silence. But Rosalind doesn’t blame him for his silence. Both of them can see what they feel.<br/>The mouth lies, begs, confesses, and is overwhelmed. The eyes stare and reflect. The mouth opens and closes, It hides the tongue, and all the rest of the messy, complicated, literal and metaphorical interior. It leads deep into the body while the eyes remain contentedly fixed on the mind. The mouth is both presence and absence, now lips pressed together, now the space inside when the lips part. The mouth manages, and sometimes fails to manage, speech, food, erotic pleasure, breath itself, while the eyes gaze, or glaze over, or close. The mouth’s an assemblage of disparate parts - lips, tongue, teeth, the cavern of the throat beyond - which switch back and forth in importance depending upon the needs of the moment.<br/>The mouth tells us who is alive and who is dead, The eyes may calmly close, or remain fixed in a stare. But it’s the last breath we look for, and want to trust. “If that her breath will mist or stain the stone,” King Lear desperately says of the dead Cordelia,” Why then she lives.” He lets his eyes deceive him.” Do you see this? Look on her! Look! Her lips! / Look there, look there – “<br/><br/>8 A good friend of mine told me that all his life people - women especially - felt compelled by his presence as a listener because he looked them in the eye. This demonstrated concern, attentiveness, interest, sympathy. Whatever the emotion, it made him present, because of the way his gaze met theirs - deeply, with concentration. ”But I was never looking at their eyes,” he told me.” I always looked at peoples’ mouths. I’m looking at yours mow.”<br/><br/>9 This book confronts us with an excess of mouths. Sometimes there’s an eye visible, as if to remind us of what we’re not really concerned with, the kinds of metaphors we can’t turn to, or should rethink.” I always thought.” my friend told me,’ that my mouth would give me away .Never my eyes.”<br/><br/>10 “The teeth are an issue, it seems to me,” another friend observed. ”In what way?” I asked. He looked closer.” I don’t know,” he said.<br/><br/>11 Uncanny, we sometimes think about a particular kind of strangeness. Déeà vu. Arriving at a place we’ve never been and feeling we know it, that if we were to open a certain door we wouldn’t be surprised by what we’d find. Or suddenly suspecting that a doll or a statue has moved, perhaps opened its eyes, when of course in reality that could never happen. The uncanny event puts quotation marks around “reality.” undermining our trust in its stability. And calling into question our assumption that we know the rules that govern our world.<br/>Sigmund Freud’s brilliant, messy, conflicted essay of 1919.”The’uncanny.” considers a variety of interconnected ways of thinking about and defining its subject. Freud suggests that one kind of uncanny sensation arises from a moment that feels simultaneously strange and familiar, creating an unsettling awareness of what we should know, or once knew, but have forgotten, outgrown, or repressed.” An uncanny effect.” Freud writes.” is often and easily produced by effacing the distinction between imagination and reality, such as when something that that we have hitherto regarded as imaginary appears before us in reality, or when a symbol takes over the full functions and significance of the thing it symbolizes,”<br/>One of the emblematic instances of the uncanny in literature is doubt about whether an apparently animate being really is alive, or whether something that shouldn’t be alive in fact is - a doll. for example. or an automaton. In literature the uncanny depends upon the creation of a sense of interpretative uncertainty. first for the characters, then more profoundly for the rules of the story are(what its context is, in what terms it should be read),the writer is to maintain this “frustration” in a way that is engaging, and eventually illuminating.<br/>Interpretive confusion returns us to our initial response to these pictures - our uncertainty about what we are looking at - a person, or a doll, statue, or other work of art. I don’t know how this sense of intellectual uncertainty will play out over the course of more than a hundred such images. Indeed, there’s something a little uncanny about trying to write about the effect of a sequence of pictures I’ve seen only small parts of. What am I accurately anticipating? What am I conjuring up or reading in? But this tension between the work itself and the viewer’s imagination can be a powerful strategy, creating a situation in which the progressive discoveries of the artist are later reenacted by the observer.<br/><br/>12 “you try so hard to figure it out.” my wife said.” What does this mean? And you’re stopped. Well, not stopped, but frustrated. But not frustrated. exactly. Something else. What are they looking at? You wonder. And where are they? They all seem to be coming out of the same moment.”<br/><br/>13 Describing the process that produced these images feels like a kind of betrayal, a way of dispelling the uncanny. Finally, however, I think that knowing certain facts gives the images a different kind of presence, and one that is no less compelling, provocative, or unsettling.<br/>The subjects are carved wooden figures in several medieval altarpieces located in the Gothic Historiska Museet in Stockholm. They were photographed using a single chip surveillance video camera the size of a quarter. Holding it between her index finger and thumb. Hamilton slowly moved her hand around the mouths of the figures. watching the progress on a small monitor to the side.<br/>The process itself is richly metaphorical - the tiny camera like a pencil invisibly inscribing the air around the figures, or like the pen a reader might pick up to jot down thoughts in the margins of a book. The hand contains the eye that follows the curves of the mouth. Is the motion of the hand “a futile coaxing of the mouth to sound?” Hamilton wonders. “The still images a futile attempt to see the voice”<br/>The final images were then selected from the videotape in a process interestingly parallel to the act of filming. Just as the hand once moved through the air around those carved mouths, later, scrolling through the footage, Hamilton allowed the hand’s rhythms to make the initial choices. The first process was” one of proximity in space, the second one of circling back and forth within time.” Those frames that” held neither too much nor too little information” were then enlarged and printed.<br/>What exactly should we call them? Photographs? Stills from a film? They’re both, of course, but neither exactly. Our sense of what it means to pose for as well as to take a photograph doesn’t really apply here, just as the eye doesn’t stare through a lens, but off to the side, while the tiny camera circles and shadows the face .The hand’s gestures create the stream of video images. The monitor displays them in real time, but movement itself conceals the individual pictures that later will be found there.<br/>In Camera Lucida Roland Barthes writes,” I project the present photograph’s immobility upon the past shot, and it is this arrest which constitutes the pose.” When the photograph is” animated and becomes cinema,” its essence - its life as that particular moment of stillness - “deteriorates” for Barthes, since in the photograph” something has posed in front of the tiny hole and has remained there forever (that is my feeling) ; but in cinema, something has passed in front of this same tiny hole: the pose is swept away and denied by the continuous series of images…..”Hamilton’s images seem to occupy a middle ground between the “pose” and the “continuous series.” Or perhaps they claim nothing as fixed as “ground,” and instead exist as a kind of vibration between the illusion of the pose and the illusion of continuous time.<br/>“The project of these images,” Hamilton says,” is to “return time,” or grant time to those immobile statues…At thirty frames per second, each frame is a singular moment, but they aren’t moments we can really see until we take apart or separate the structure of the basis of the meaning.” One might also say that separation is the condition of the viewer of these images, and a sign of this is a question like,’ What is it? ’ Separation from both the source of the images (the altarpieces, their histories and narrative) and the nature of the process(stills drawn from the videotape), locates the viewer in a position of unease and worry, as well as fascination and wonderment . But knowing about the carvings or about the way the images were produced, finally – and appropriately - doesn’t feel like a conclusive explanation as much as a complication, an additional set of questions, a continuing investigation .<br/><br/>14 This intricate” act of making,” Hamilton says,” might revive these wooden statues and return them from the dead, or give them voice.” Of course she can’t actually give them voice, so they could speak aloud and for themselves, but she can suggest that possibility.<br/>“The mouths are open in some cases to speak,” she says,” and yet they are silent. And so it is the potential of speaking - of anything being spoken - the potential of having meaning, that is registered.” What’s unheard remains unheard, but the silence has been given life. The images seem charged, with a kind of imminence that won’t give way to revelation, as if that moment of possibility just before speech were endlessly extended. The value of ambiguity is the pressure it places on the viewer. The blur is its emblem, resonant but impenetrable. Through the blur the aura is restored.<br/><br/>15 But what, in fact, is “aura” ?In one sense it’s presence, that particular atmosphere or quality that, Webster’s explains,” seems to arise from and surround a person or thing. ”The example is;” enveloped in an aura of grandeur.”<br/>The Oxford English Dictionary is more consciously eloquent - “a subtle emanation or exhalation or exhalation from any substance. e.g. the aroma of blood. the odour of flowers, etc,” But in the worlds of philosophy and literary criticism the idea of “aura” is securely linked to Walter Benjamin.” What is aura, actually?” Benjamin asks in his essay,” Little History of photography.” And he answers:” A strange weave of space and time: the unique appearance or semblance of distance, no matter how close it may be. While at rest on a summer’s noon, to trace a range of mountains on the horizon, or a branch that throws its shadow on the observer, until the moment or the hour become part of their appearance - this is what it means to breathe the aura of those mountains, that branch.”<br/>Benjamin’s lyrical response to his own question suggests that to sense the aura is somehow to conflate time and space. The moment or hour becomes part of the appearance of a range of mountains, or the shadow of a branch. But Benjamin makes things difficult by defining his subject through sentence fragments that represent movement(first tracing, then breathing).Tracing connects with that” weave of space and time.” and then becomes the act of looking that results in uniting the thing with the particular moment in which it is apprehended. Then the observer breathes in the aura of “those mountains, that branch” as if it were life itself. Looking becomes both a creative action and a physical, bodily function - eye and mouth working together.<br/>Aura, for Benjamin , is importantly associated with uniqueness, the work of art still possessed” the authority of the object.”” We know,” Benjamin writes in “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” ”that the earliest art works originated in the service of art with reference to its aura is never entirely separated from its ritual function.” This is that complicated” weave of time and space.” When the image functioned at full force within its tradition, when as the object of a cult it was suffused with meaning, however close a person might literally stand, the object remained importantly and essentially distant, unapproachable, exactly and only itself.<br/><br/>16 “I never actually physically touch the statues when I film them,” Hamilton says .”But it feels like touch - it seems like a caress.”<br/><br/>17 A clear photograph of one of the altarpieces in Stockholm would be fascinating but static. Beautiful, perhaps, but never uncanny. Aura would be replaced by fact. Anyone could approach it.<br/>Thinking of the “act of making” these pictures as one of “revival,” and therefore as a kind of magical restoration of the sense of life and voice, may usefully return us to Freud.” Our analysis of the instances of the uncanny,” Freud writes,” has led us back to the old, animistic conception of the universe, which was characterized by the idea that the world was peopled with the spirits of human beings….and everything which now strikes us as ’uncanny ’fulfills the condition of stirring those vestiges of animistic mental activity within us and bringing them to expression I am reminded here of the uncanny effect of photography itself. We’ve outgrown it, but how surprised, how unnerved the first photographers must have felt when they captured a person on a piece of paper, exactly as he looked, only smaller. That ability would have seemed magical. It would have felt like an act that could permanently alter the world, as indeed it did. In his” Little History of photography,” Benjamin quotes Karl Dauthendey describing the making of the first daguerreotype:” We didn’t trust ness of these human images, and believed that the little tiny faces in the pictures could see us…..<br/>“Nowadays,” Freud writes about” primitive ” thinking ,”we have surmounted such ways of thought; but we do not feel quite sure of our new set of beliefs, and the old ones still exist within us ready to seize upon any confirmation .”So a congregation of faces rises out of those old beliefs, as if to speak. But they’re silent, since they are, after all, pictures, and since in reality they are made of wood. The camera has granted them the illusion of life, and restored the aura they once possessed as emblems that pointed to another world.<br/><br/>18 In every photograph, Roland Barthes writes in Camera Lucida, we encounter” the return of the dead.” Once - and for some people still - the dead might speak through a medium. Then photography provided the dead with both a literal and a figurative medium. In Ann Hamilton’s pictures ,what was never alive returns as life. We may suspect, after viewing a number of these images, that they actually are of a doll, or a piece of sculpture But knowing the real subject doesn’t render them disappointing. The aim wasn’t to trick us, but to illuminate them. Identified as figures from the altarpiece, they suggest a different mystery, to which now may be added a sense of pathos—how the ghost of the human inhabited the carving, how once it was thought that the gods themselves lived in or spoke through such artifacts, how that reality has disappeared, that aura fallen away, as the gods have vanished, and the carvings moved from cathedral to museum, where they can be admired, but no longer believed. In Hamilton’s pictures, for a moment, they are lured back into their ritual existence, their truest lives.<br/><br/><br/>Lawrence Raab is the author of six collections of poems, including What We Don’t Know About Each Other (1993), winner of the National poetry series, and a finalist for the National Book Award, The probable World (2000),and most recently Visible Signs: New and Selected poems(2003).He teaches literature and writing at Williams College in Williamstown, Massachusetts. USA.</div></th></tr><tr class="tr1 r_one"><th colspan="2" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 1.5%; VERTICAL-ALIGN: bottom; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="fontother tipad"><span style="FLOAT: right;"><a href="javascript:scroll(0,0)">顶端</a>
</span></div></th></tr></tbody></table></div><p></p><a name="128279"></a><div style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px; BORDER-BOTTOM: #535353 1px solid;"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" align="center" border="0" style="TABLE-LAYOUT: fixed; WORD-WRAP: break-word;"><tbody><tr class="h"><td height="25"> [2楼] <a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/profile.php?action-show-uid-.html" target="_blank"><span style="COLOR: #ff0000;">guest</span></a>
<img alt="该用户目前不在线" src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/read/offline2.gif" align="absMiddle"/>
<a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-reply-fid-13-tid-16700.html">[回复]</a> 2007-06-13 18:20 <div class="info1"><div class="info2"><span id="info2" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" border="0"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/profile.php?action-show-uid-0.html">查看作者资料</a><br/><a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/message.php?action-write-touid-0.html">发送短消息</a>
</td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div><div class="user1"><div class="user2"><span id="layer2" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"><br/></td></tr><tr><td><img src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/level/8.gif" alt=""/>
<br/>级别: <font color="#555555">*</font><br/>精华: <font color="#008000"><b>*</b></font><br/>发帖: <font color="#008000"><b>*</b></font><br/>威望: <font color="#984b98"><b>* 点</b></font><br/>嘿币: <font color="#984b98"><b>* 元</b></font><br/>贡献: <font color="#ff0000"><b>* 值</b></font><br/>在线时间小时)<br/>注册时间:*<br/>最后登录:* </td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div></td><td align="right" height="28"><div class="fontother"><a title="引用回复这个帖子" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-quote-fid-13-tid-16700-pid-128279-article-2.html">引用</a>
<a title="推荐此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/sendemail.php?action-tofriend-tid-16700.html">推荐</a>
<a title="编辑此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-modify-fid-13-tid-16700-pid-128279-article-2.html">编辑</a>
<a title="举报此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/job.php?action-report-tid-16700-pid-128279.html" target="_blank">举报</a>
</div></td></tr><tr class="tr1"><th class="r_one" valign="top" colspan="2" height="100%" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 15px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 80%; PADDING-TOP: 5px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="tpc_content">安·汉密尔顿<br/><br/><br/>1956年生于俄亥俄州利马，安·汉密尔顿最著称于世的是其各种因地制宜设计的大型装置，这些设施以各种现有的物体、纤维和有机材料组合而成，加入了声音和视觉元素，使人产生各种感官上的联想。通过包括印刷、摄影、录像、表演与雕塑在内的各种实践，汉密尔顿的作品体现了一种在视觉和语言及触觉方面的比较前卫的探索。 <br/><br/>通过大量的国际展览，她的作品得到了一系列的奖项，包括麦克阿瑟奖、国家艺术奖，维克纳斯艺术中心奖，以及古根海姆学者奖。1999年她代表美国参加第48届威尼斯建筑双年展，1991年参加了圣保罗双年奖。汉密尔顿目前是俄亥俄州立大学艺术系的教授。 <br/><br/>Ann Hamilton <br/><br/>Born in 1956 in Lima, Ohio, Ann Hamilton is best known for her<br/>large-scale, site-specific installations that weave together evocative<br/>and sensual combinations of found objects, fabrics and organic<br/>material, with elements of sound and video. With a practice that spans<br/>numerous genres, including printmaking, photography, video,<br/>performance, and sculpture, much of Hamilton\'s work manifests an<br/>ongoing investigation into the interrelated nature of vision and<br/>language and bodily experience. With an extensive list of<br/>internationally exhibitions, Hamilton has received a number of awards<br/>and honors, including a MacArthur Fellowship, a National Endowment for<br/>the Arts Visual Arts Fellowship, a Wexner Center for the Arts<br/>Residency, and a Guggenheim Memorial Fellowship. She represented the<br/>United States at the 48th Venice Biennale in 1999 and at the 21st<br/>International S?o Paulo Bienal in 1991. Hamilton is currently a<br/>professor in the Department of Art at The Ohio State University in<br/>Columbus, Ohio.</div></th></tr><tr class="tr1 r_one"><th colspan="2" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 1.5%; VERTICAL-ALIGN: bottom; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="fontother tipad"><span style="FLOAT: right;"><a href="javascript:scroll(0,0)">顶端</a>
</span></div></th></tr></tbody></table></div><p></p><a name="128304"></a><div style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px; BORDER-BOTTOM: #535353 1px solid;"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" align="center" border="0" style="TABLE-LAYOUT: fixed; WORD-WRAP: break-word;"><tbody><tr class="h"><td height="25"> [3楼] <a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/profile.php?action-show-uid-37303.html" target="_blank"><span style="COLOR: #ff0000;">雕牌</span></a>
<img alt="该用户目前不在线" src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/read/offline2.gif" align="absMiddle"/>
<a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-reply-fid-13-tid-16700.html">[回复]</a> 2007-06-13 23:09 <div class="info1"><div class="info2"><span id="info3" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" border="0"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/profile.php?action-show-uid-37303.html">查看作者资料</a><br/><a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/message.php?action-write-touid-37303.html">发送短消息</a>
</td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div><div class="user1"><div class="user2"><span id="layer3" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"><br/><br/></td></tr><tr><td><img src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/level/8.gif" alt=""/>
<br/>级别: <font color="#555555">1级 小屁孩</font><br/>精华: <font color="#008000"><b>0</b></font><br/>发帖: <font color="#008000"><b>2</b></font><br/>威望: <font color="#984b98"><b>3 点</b></font><br/>嘿币: <font color="#984b98"><b>20 元</b></font><br/>贡献: <font color="#ff0000"><b>0 值</b></font><br/>在线时间:4(小时)<br/>注册时间:2007-06-09<br/>最后登录:2007-06-15 </td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div></td><td align="right" height="28"><div class="fontother"><a title="引用回复这个帖子" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-quote-fid-13-tid-16700-pid-128304-article-3.html">引用</a>
<a title="推荐此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/sendemail.php?action-tofriend-tid-16700.html">推荐</a>
<a title="编辑此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-modify-fid-13-tid-16700-pid-128304-article-3.html">编辑</a>
<a title="举报此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/job.php?action-report-tid-16700-pid-128304.html" target="_blank">举报</a>
</div></td></tr><tr class="tr1"><th class="r_one" valign="top" colspan="2" height="100%" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 15px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 80%; PADDING-TOP: 5px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="tpc_content">看啊</div></th></tr><tr class="tr1 r_one"><th colspan="2" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 1.5%; VERTICAL-ALIGN: bottom; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="fontother tipad"><span style="FLOAT: right;"><a href="javascript:scroll(0,0)">顶端</a>
</span></div></th></tr></tbody></table></div><p></p><a name="128316"></a><div style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px; BORDER-BOTTOM: #535353 1px solid;"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" align="center" border="0" style="TABLE-LAYOUT: fixed; WORD-WRAP: break-word;"><tbody><tr class="h"><td height="25"> [4楼] <a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/profile.php?action-show-uid-.html" target="_blank"><span style="COLOR: #ff0000;">guest</span></a>
<img alt="该用户目前不在线" src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/read/offline2.gif" align="absMiddle"/>
<a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-reply-fid-13-tid-16700.html">[回复]</a> 2007-06-14 12:04 <div class="info1"><div class="info2"><span id="info4" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" border="0"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/profile.php?action-show-uid-0.html">查看作者资料</a><br/><a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/message.php?action-write-touid-0.html">发送短消息</a>
</td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div><div class="user1"><div class="user2"><span id="layer4" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"><br/></td></tr><tr><td><img src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/level/8.gif" alt=""/>
<br/>级别: <font color="#555555">*</font><br/>精华: <font color="#008000"><b>*</b></font><br/>发帖: <font color="#008000"><b>*</b></font><br/>威望: <font color="#984b98"><b>* 点</b></font><br/>嘿币: <font color="#984b98"><b>* 元</b></font><br/>贡献: <font color="#ff0000"><b>* 值</b></font><br/>在线时间小时)<br/>注册时间:*<br/>最后登录:* </td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div></td><td align="right" height="28"><div class="fontother"><a title="引用回复这个帖子" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-quote-fid-13-tid-16700-pid-128316-article-4.html">引用</a>
<a title="推荐此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/sendemail.php?action-tofriend-tid-16700.html">推荐</a>
<a title="编辑此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-modify-fid-13-tid-16700-pid-128316-article-4.html">编辑</a>
<a title="举报此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/job.php?action-report-tid-16700-pid-128316.html" target="_blank">举报</a>
</div></td></tr><tr class="tr1"><th class="r_one" valign="top" colspan="2" height="100%" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 15px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 80%; PADDING-TOP: 5px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="tpc_content">《PHORA》 安•汉密尔顿（Ann Hamilton）个展<br/>— 《流》美国电子研究院十年回顾展 特别展<br/><br/>策展人：冯博一<br/>展览时间：2007.06.14-06.24<br/>开幕：2007.06.14 14：00-18：00<br/>展览地点：北京798厂方音空间<br/>联系电话：86-10-8459-9257<br/>电子信箱：<a href="mailto:info@funartspace.com">info@funartspace.com</a><br/>网站：<a href="http://www.funartspace.com/" target="_blank">www.funartspace.com</a></div></th></tr><tr class="tr1 r_one"><th colspan="2" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 1.5%; VERTICAL-ALIGN: bottom; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="fontother tipad"><span style="FLOAT: right;"><a href="javascript:scroll(0,0)">顶端</a>
</span></div></th></tr></tbody></table></div><p></p><a name="a"></a><a name="128357"></a><div style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px; BORDER-BOTTOM: #535353 1px solid;"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" align="center" border="0" style="TABLE-LAYOUT: fixed; WORD-WRAP: break-word;"><tbody><tr class="h"><td height="25"> [5楼] <a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/profile.php?action-show-uid-36396.html" target="_blank"><span style="COLOR: #ff0000;">funartspace</span></a>
<img alt="该用户目前不在线" src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/read/offline2.gif" align="absMiddle"/>
<a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-reply-fid-13-tid-16700.html">[回复]</a> 2007-06-14 23:49 <div class="info1"><div class="info2"><span id="info5" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" border="0"><tbody><tr><td><a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/profile.php?action-show-uid-36396.html">查看作者资料</a><br/><a href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/message.php?action-write-touid-36396.html">发送短消息</a>
</td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div><div class="user1"><div class="user2"><span id="layer5" style="VISIBILITY: hidden;"><table class="info" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"><br/><br/></td></tr><tr><td><img src="http://www.heilan.com/forum/images/wind/level/9.gif" alt=""/>
<br/>级别: <font color="#555555">2级 跑腿的</font><br/>精华: <font color="#008000"><b>0</b></font><br/>发帖: <font color="#008000"><b>15</b></font><br/>威望: <font color="#984b98"><b>23 点</b></font><br/>嘿币: <font color="#984b98"><b>220 元</b></font><br/>贡献: <font color="#ff0000"><b>0 值</b></font><br/>在线时间:24(小时)<br/>注册时间:2007-04-27<br/>最后登录:2007-06-30 </td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div></td><td align="right" height="28"><div class="fontother"><a title="引用回复这个帖子" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-quote-fid-13-tid-16700-pid-128357-article-5.html">引用</a>
<a title="推荐此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/sendemail.php?action-tofriend-tid-16700.html">推荐</a>
<a title="编辑此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/post.php?action-modify-fid-13-tid-16700-pid-128357-article-5.html">编辑</a>
<a title="举报此帖" href="http://www.heilan.com/forum/job.php?action-report-tid-16700-pid-128357.html" target="_blank">举报</a>
</div></td></tr><tr class="tr1"><th class="r_one" valign="top" colspan="2" height="100%" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 15px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 80%; PADDING-TOP: 5px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="tpc_content"><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_d4fb380f1e6ac8b.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/><br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_3f0bb21a589b807.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/>声音作品部分<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_cfb106d24402d7d.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_a9d023f03e0d608.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_f99e5dc0c832e1c.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_8634474379dd2d7.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_959199c0d800bad.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_41d001d20bb1f9a.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_9eacbc4c9012b81.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_6baf3e62106b6d5.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_410c0367177e59a.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_2e6eeb1a402bd68.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/> <br/>刚结束个展的艺术家董文胜<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_e1cde1c93505b73.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_1adb7974a954581.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/><b></b><br/><img src="http://www.hishehui.com/attachment/Mon_0706/13_36396_e6683bd5d5c188d.jpg" width="500" border="0" alt=""/>
<br/><br/></div></th></tr></tbody></table></div><p></p><p></p><p><font size="7">转自HISHEHUI!</font></p></span>
IP卡
狗仔卡
发表于 2007-8-4 13:59:17
小时)<br/>注册时间:*<br/>最后登录:* </td></tr></tbody></table></span></div></div></td><td align="right" height="28"><div class="fontother"> </div></td></tr><tr class="tr1"><th class="r_one" valign="top" colspan="2" height="100%" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 15px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 80%; PADDING-TOP: 5px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="tpc_content">浏览Ann Hamilton 170张图片的方法<br/> <br/>文／劳伦斯•阿尔伯（Lawrence Raab）<br/><br/>1 这是什么？这是一张嘴。但这是一张什么样的嘴？是谁的嘴？是人的嘴吗？或者是一具死尸的嘴？一个洋娃娃？一尊塑像？ <br/>这些紧闭的嘴里含含糊糊的又哭又闹，又叫又嚷，说的到底是什么东西呢？也可能他们是在默默地微笑？这些嘴没一张都显得神秘而又似乎在表达着什么东西。 <br/>当一个比较抽象的画面出现的时候，我们马上抓住画面中的嘴作为一个参考点。我们可以看到牙齿，还可以看到鼻子的影像，有时还可以看到眼睛。就好像我们在摸索什么东西。 <br/>当某一个画面看起来比较吓人的时候，好多时候都会出现这样的情况，很多这样的画面出现在一起的时候可能更加吓人。这时候就算是答案显而易见的时候，人们也往往会脱口而出：这是什么东西？而表面的图像背后隐藏的又是什么那？ <br/><br/>2 有一个朋友说：它们就像是证据一样，这些证据如果不放在一定的背景之中我们是不会知道如何处置的。在试图解释一张我们只能看清一部分的面孔时遇到的问题使我们想起有时外表时如此容易的迷惑人。我们经常会走得近一点，这样就可以看得更清。但在这里我们已经凑得太近，让人感到难受了。我们希望能够退后一步，这样我们能够看到整个一张脸，整个身体，以及背后得空间。当然这样做是不可能的，即便模糊的视野告诉我们应该调整一下视角，重新找到焦距。这可能成为一种建立背景信息的方法。缺少这种方法的话，我们就更加能够认识到产生的问题，以及我们所处的位置给我们造成的困难。如果这是背景信息的话，整个画面就像是一些碎片，悬浮在空中，没有任何可以驱动它们的动词信息，它们的行为无法体现，它们的思想无法了解。<br/><br/>3 如果这种模糊将某些画面变得抽象的话，这种抽象让人感到很不舒服。相反，它们经常显得正在向你靠近，逐渐移向焦点－但就是没有移动到正确的位置。如果他们显得非常的模糊的话我们不知道如何靠近他们的方法－形状、策略、或者是背景这些可以在模糊的环境中透出图像的含义的东西统统都没有。与简单的混乱和随意的含糊不清不同，模糊也有其自身的价值。模糊意味这一种意图，转而意味这创作者的一种控制。我们希望这个创作者是有计划的，他决定通过抑制一种理解从而透露另一种含义的理解。也可能他希望我们一直保持一种似是而非的感觉。<br/><br/>4 这些是我们在日常生活中捕捉到的画面－可以把它们叫做抓拍－在这些画面中我们追求的是清晰。这些模糊的照片让人感到失望，应该归咎于某些人的失误。假想有这么一个派对，比如说是一个婚礼，每一个人都面带欢笑，每一个人都尽情拥抱。这是的目的就是捕捉到这一刻的场面，什么人在场，他们看起来如何等等。照片的功能是保留其中的主题，而摄影师发挥的是一种机械式的功能－而不是制作一个在其中人人都占有一席之地的照片。 <br/>如果这时摄影师晃动了照相机，这张照片就会成为他的一个失败的表现。其中的模糊不是为了表现应该表现的主题，只是因为摄影师一时不小心而造成的。清晰是固定的，而模糊是移动的，是一瞬间的表现，是摄影师技艺不精的结果。 <br/>当然我们都很熟悉将模糊作为一种特殊处理的艺术效果。通过这种模糊可以将某些事情刻画得更加真实－一个运动员得动作，一个士兵得死去－它得效果远胜过精确的画面。一副照片中飞驰而过的汽车造成的模糊意味着力量和速度，或许还有驾驶员的疯狂（如果我们也将买一辆这样的车的话，我们的感觉会是如何）。一副清晰的照片失去了场景中所有的时间元素，无法表现驾驶员的乐趣，只是将车子固定在所有周围的场景之中。<br/>一副照片中的模糊－不管是一个失误或者是一个特殊的处理－将照片中明显的主题移动到了一边，而让我们意识到摄影师观察事物的行为，以及在多长的时间段之中对事物进行的观察。画面中的模糊可以防止画面于拍摄画面的时间脱离开来。这是一段由动作刻写的文字，这是图像本身所无法包含的，是一个超越相框的连 续的描述，同时也指向一去不返的过去时光。 <br/><br/>5 那我们该怎么处理这些模糊的嘴脸呢？它们不是抓拍的作品，所以不要提抓拍的问题。这些模糊明显是刻意加工的，是为了产生一种模糊的感觉。但是这种氛围和摄影师的视野以及其存在很不协调，于对这些面容的不加雕琢的再现完全不同。 <br/>Ann Hamilton说，这些照片的模糊的程度没有到失去视线的焦距的地步。所以它们在我看来不是由于移动造成的，而更加像是由于远近造成的，由于对焦的不精确造成的。你看到的是一个相机在朝里面移动，或者是朝外面移动，但绝对不是在朝焦点移动。这更加像是在表现一种不完全的记忆。<br/>在某一些基础的层面上，景物脱离了焦距就会变得模糊。但是Hamilton透过了事物的现象指出了之中内在的本质。由急速移动的汽车产生的模糊，运动员甩动的身体－这些都是为了营造一种瞬间的感觉，刻画当时视觉上和感觉上的效果。这些照片没有在我们和时间之间建立起联系，至少不是我们平时所说的那种连续的有生命的时间。前向和后向的移动也是移动，但是于横向的和远离的移动是完全不同的。如果说后一种于描述相联系的话（一件事之后又另一件事），那么前一种则看起来更加内在（越来越近，进入或者出来），也许更加的具有猜测性，更加心理化（记忆和回忆），但是不管怎么说更加难以界定。不是模糊或者迷茫，只是说更加令人不安，就好像陌生的东西刚刚开始变得熟悉，但突然又不熟悉了。<br/><br/>6 当我给我的妻子看了一些不连续的照片之后，我妻子说这是美女与野兽。她说得没错，唇部看起来很美很性感，而其他照片当中破裂的嘴唇和参差不齐的牙齿显得很吓人。这是一个让她自然而然想到的一个故事，一个可以涵盖和解释这一切的故事。如果又合适的背景的话，这些照片完全可以融入到背景中去。 <br/>当然他们并不愿意妥协。但是如果我们最终要控制这些照片的话，我们对其组织，明了，理解的种种要求就成为Hamilton的理论中为了探索和联系而常常提到的各种部分。她的目的不是否定观众对于秩序的爱好，而是要把他们引向更大更有趣的注意目标上去。这种认知的过程可以将对意义本身的思索过程变得至少与发现意义一样有价值。<br/><br/>7 如果说这些照片引发的第一个问题是“这些是什么东西？”的话，那么第二个问题很有可能涉及到这些照片情感上的含义。我们应该如何面对这些我们所假设的－或者是想象的－含义呢？<br/>我们都不自觉的依赖我们观察人们面貌的能力。能够隐藏自己的情感的人只是其中的一大部分。人的脸是很有表现力的，特别是某一些部分，最著名的是眼睛，这是心灵的窗口，自我的一面镜子，在快乐的时候眼睛里会闪现火花，在伤感的时候眼睛会显得没有神采，在喜悦的时候眼睛会放出光芒。看着别人的眼睛，我们觉得我们可以感到他人的感觉。恋人们互相注视，眼睛里反射出的是自己心爱的人，有时恋人们的视野被激动的泪水模糊。有人说：我可以从她的眼睛里看出来。他的眼神出卖了他。或者有人说：他的眼神空洞，熟视无睹，毫无生气。<br/>如果这些照片把注意力集中在眼睛上，那么它们看起来应该是什么样子的呢？我想大概会更加令人舒服，但是在情感上面的紧张感会小一些。当我们把我们的注意力从脸上最有表现力的某一个部分转移到一张不稳定的，令人紧张和焦虑的嘴上的时候，我们很容易会感到有一些手足无措。<br/>归根结底，嘴对我们是如此的重要，它的工作负担也是如此之重。它可以发出声音以供人们交流，虽然我们有时立即会怀疑别人对我们所说的话，转而通过眼神来确认。为了能够明确地进行口头表达，我们必须学习语言。但是通过一个眼神－我们是多么希望仅仅通过一个眼神就可以表达那些令我们难以启齿的含义！在莎士比亚的戏剧中，一见钟情的情节至少在一定的时间之内是不需要插入台词来打断的。在皆大欢喜中的Orlando当有机会和Rosalind说话的时候却变得哑口无言，他对自己说：“激情锁住了我的舌头”。但是Rosalind没有因为他的沉默而怪他，他们互相之间都能看出来对方的感受。 <br/>人的嘴巴会撒谎，会恳求，会忏悔，会说不出话来。而人的眼睛会注视会反射。人的嘴巴可以张开也可以闭上。它可以藏住舌头，以及其他种种复杂的，直接的或者具有寓意的内部组织。人的嘴巴一直延伸到身体内部很深的部分，而眼睛则牢牢地和人的思想向联系。人的嘴巴是一种存在也是一种不存在，时而双唇紧闭，时而嘴巴张开可以看到里面的部分。嘴巴管理着，有时也可能管理得不太好，语言，食物，情色上得快感，还有呼吸，而眼睛只是注视，或者了望，或者干脆闭上。嘴巴是各种不同组织的组合，唇，舌，牙齿，延伸向下的喉管－它们在不同的时候更具需要会来回反复地运动。<br/>嘴巴可以告诉我们谁活着或者谁死了。眼睛可以一直紧紧地闭上，或者一直长时间地注视。但是我们追求的只是人的最后一口气，我们相信的也是人的最后一口气。李尔王对死去的Cordelia说：“如果她的呼吸可以玷污石头的话，她活着还有什么意义？”他让自己的眼睛欺骗自己：“你看见了吗？看她！看！她的嘴唇！/看那里，看！－”<br/><br/>8 我的一个好友告诉我，在他的整个人生之中，人们－特别是女人－觉得有他在场充当听众是一件很压抑的事情，因为他总是用眼睛注视着他们。这表明了一种关心、注意、兴趣、同情。不管是哪一种情感，他注视人们的方式使得人们感受到他的存在－这是一种充满关怀的深深的注视。但是他跟我说“其实我从来不看他们的眼睛，我看的是他们的嘴，我现在就在看着你的嘴。”<br/><br/>9 这本书在我们面前展现了各种不同的嘴，有时可以看到一只眼睛，似乎在提醒我们其实不是关注的对象，这是我们无法理解的一种比喻，至少是我们应该重新考虑的。我的朋友说：“我一直以为我得嘴巴会背叛我，而不是我的眼睛”。<br/><br/>10 我的另外一个朋友还说：“牙齿也是一个问题”。我说：“是哪一方面的问题？”他朝我凑近说：“我不知道”。<br/><br/>11 离奇，有时候我们考虑的是一种特殊的奇怪感觉，似曾相识的感觉。当我们到了一个从来没有到过的地方，而觉得好像来过这个地方，打开一扇门但是却对里面的东西丝毫也不感到好奇。或者突然觉得是不是一个洋娃娃或者一尊雕塑被移动过，或者是不是突然把眼睛张开了。当然在现实之中这是绝对不可能发生的。离奇的事件在“现实”两个字上加上了引号，使我们对于现实产生了怀疑，同时怀疑我们是不是真的了解控制世界的这些规律。<br/>Sigmund 弗洛伊德在1919年写的伟大，浩瀚而又饱受攻击的论文“离奇”，研究了各种相互关联的考虑和定义主体的方法。弗洛伊德认为有一种离奇的感受起源于人们感到陌生又熟悉的那一刻，这时一种认为这些我们应该是知道的，或者曾经知道，或者忘却了，或者被压抑住了的令人不安的感觉。弗洛伊德说：“一种离奇的效果通常是通过去除想象和现实之间的界限来产生的。例如有些东西我们一直认为是我们的想象，但突然在现实中出现，或者当某个符号突然代表了其所代表的事物的所有意义和功能”。<br/>在文学当中一个比较又代表性的离奇现象是突然怀疑某种活的东西是不是真的具有生命，或者某些不应该具有生命的东西实际上是一个木偶－例如一个机器人之类的东西。在文学中，离奇的事情起决于创造一种可以进行解释的不确定感，这种不确定感首先被文学中的角色感受到，然后被读者更加深刻地感受到。如果读者始终不能理解故事的规律是什么（背景是什么，该用什么样的方式来阅读），整个解释过程的顺畅就会受到阻碍。作者的任务是保持这种阻碍的动人之处，最后让人彻底恍然大悟。<br/>这种解释的混乱再次将我们带到了我们对这些照片的最初的感受之中－我们不能确定我们正在看的到底是什么－一个人，一个洋娃娃，还是一尊雕塑，或者是其他的艺术作品。我不知道在这一百多张照片之中，这种心智上的不确定感产生什么样的作用。事实上，尝试写一个系列的照片，而这些照片我本人只见过一小部分，这本身就有一点离奇。我到底是在期待什么？我希望创造什么还是解读什么？但是这种存在于作品本身和观赏者的想象之间的张力本身就是一种很好的策略，它可以创造一种条件，在这种条件之下艺术家渐进式的发现可以在后来被观赏者激活。<br/><br/>12 我太太对我说：“你费这么大的力气想要把它搞清楚？这是什么意思，你现在停下来了。不，不是停下来，而是遇到挫折了。但确切的说又不是挫折。而是其他的什么东西。你觉得他们到底在看什么？他们在什么地方？它们都看起来像是同一刻出现的”。<br/><br/>13描述这些照片制作的过程像是一种背叛，一种去除离奇性的方法。但是最后，我还是觉得对一些事实基本了解可以使这些照片获得一种不同的面貌，这种面貌同样的具有感染力，刺激性，和令人不安。<br/>这些照片里的使斯德哥儿摩Historika Museet天主教堂中的一些中世纪的祭坛用的木雕人像。它们是用一个硬币大小的单片监控摄像头拍摄的作品。用食指和拇指拿住这些人像以后，Hamilton慢慢地用手在人像的嘴部周围移动，并使用一个小型的监控器在旁边观察整个过程。<br/>整个过程本身具有很大的寓意－如铅笔一般细小的摄像机在人像周围的空气中令人无法察觉地慢慢刻写，又像人们想要在书的边角上记下自己的思路时手中拿起的铅笔。手中握的时用来观察嘴部曲线的眼睛。Hamilton不禁在想，这种手部的动作是不是要引诱嘴巴发出声音呢？<br/>最后根据整个拍摄的过程，在胶片中选出这些最终的照片。就像是手在嘴部周围的空间中移动的过程那样，在转过整卷胶片的时候，Hamilton依靠手的节奏来做出最初的决定。整个过程的第一步是“空间上的接近，第二步是时间上的向前转或者向后转”。其中的那些所“包含信息不多不少”的照片就被放大并印刷出来。<br/>我们到底应该把这些称作什么呢？摄影？还是电影胶片的静止？当然，它们两者兼备，但又不完全是其中的任何一个。我们一般意义上的摆姿势然后拍照在这里不适用，就好像在微型的相机在围绕着脸部旋转并将其遮住的时候，眼睛不能透过棱镜看东西，只能看到棱镜旁边的东西。手部的动作建立了一连串的摄像画面。动作将其在实时中表现出来，但是这些动作又掩盖了这些接下来会被发掘出来的单独的相片。<br/>在Camera Lucida中，Roland Barthes这样写道：“我将现代摄影中不可移动的东西映射在过去拍摄的照片上，而构成姿势的是对场面的捕捉”。当摄影开始活动并且成为电影的时候，其内在的精髓－其生命在瞬间的停顿－“开始枯竭”。对于Barthes来说，“摄影就是一些东西在一个小孔之前摆个造型，让后永远地被定格（这是我的感觉），但是在电影中，一些事物在这个小孔之前进行：造型被去掉，取而代之的是一串连续的照片……”Hamilton的照片似乎是介于造型和连续序列之间的一种形式。或者它们自认为与固定的大地完全不同，而是摇摆于造型影像和连续时间影像之间的一种形式。<br/>Hamilton说：“这些照片是为了还原时间，或者在这些不能移动的雕像张展现时间……每一秒钟拍摄三十张照片，每一张照片代表的都是一个独立的时间点，但是这些时刻在我们将结构以及其数码信息拆分出来之前是无法被我们看见的。含义的基础在于分离。”人们也可以说，分离是这些相片的观赏者所具备的条件，其中的一个表现就是人们会问，“这是什么？”在这些相片来源（祭坛用品，历史和叙述）以及整个过程（从录像中截取静止的画面）的特性之间的分离，将观赏者放在了一种令人焦虑和不安，同时又令人好奇和叹为观止的位置上。但是知道了这些木雕，或者知道了这些照片的制作过程之后，人们最终－也是自然而然地－感到与其说是一个彻底的解答还不如说是一个更加复杂的过程。因为有更多的问题产生了，有更深的探索还在等着我们。 <br/><br/>14 Hamilton说：“这个复杂的制作过程可以使人重新审视这些雕像，同时使它们从僵死中恢复生命，让它们发出自己的声音”。当然她不可能真的让它们出声，这样一来它们就可以大呼小叫，说出自己的想法，但是她还是可以提出这种可能性的。<br/>“在一部分雕像中嘴巴使张开的，意思使它们正在说话，”她说，“但是它们还是默默无语。所以它们表达的是一种说话的冲动－说任何可以说的事情－是一种表达含义的冲动”。听不见的东西最终还是听不见，但是这样以来沉默中就注入了生机。这些照片中似乎充满了一种紧迫感，使其难以表达，似乎在眼看就要开口说话之间的这一刻被无限地延长了。模糊的价值就在于其给观赏者施加的压力。里面的迷雾就是其自我的象征，使人产生共鸣但是又令人无法看透。通过这些迷雾，其中的氛围被再现出来。<br/><br/>15 但事实上什么才是“气息”？从一种意义上说就是“表现”，按照韦氏字典上的解释就是：“从某个人或者其周围产生的一种特别的氛围或者是品质”。其中举的例子是：“包含在磅礴的气息之中”。<br/>牛津英语字典的解释显得更加的丰富－是一种从物质中透出的一种细致的散发的气氛，例如血的气息，花的香味等等。但是在世界哲学和文学批评界“气息”一词于Walter Benjamin紧紧联系在一起。Benjamin在他的论文《微型摄影史》中曾经问道：“什么是气息？”然后他又自己回答到：“这是一股时间和空间之中特殊的交织， 是距离的特殊表现和模仿，不管两者之间有多么的接近。在夏日午后休息的时候，在追逐地平线远处的山脉的时候，或者一根树枝在观察者身上投下的影子，直到这一刻，这一时成为它们的外表的一部分的时候之前－这就是所谓的呼吸着山脉的气息，树枝的气息所代表的含义。”<br/>Benjamin在他的抒情诗中回应他自己的问题时说，感受到气息实际上就是连接空间和时间。这一刻，这一时实际上已经成为了山川和树影的表象的一部分。但是Benjamin通过使用代表运动（首先是追踪，然后是呼吸）的片断来定义主题又使事情变得复杂。于追踪相连的是“时间与空间的交织”，然后演变成为检验将事物与其发生的时刻相联系以后产生的结果的过程。这时观察者可以呼吸“山川和树枝的气息”，仿佛它们果真具有生命一般。观赏由此变成了一个创造性的活动，具有物理和生理上的功能－眼睛和嘴一起工作的过程。<br/>对于Benjamin来说，气氛与独特是紧紧相连的。这是经过机械复制以前的艺术作品所特有的，这时艺术仍然具有“目标的权威”。在《机械复制时代的艺术作品》一文中，Benjamin写道：“我们知道，最早期的艺术作品是在仪式上使用的－首先是魔术，然后具有宗教的性质……涉及到其气氛的艺术作品从来没有与仪式分离开来过。”这就是为什么艺术会复杂化为“时间与空间的交织”。当这些照片在其传统之下充分地发挥出其力量的时候，当作为迷信的崇拜对象，它们被赋予了含义以后，就算一个人离它站得再近，也会对其产生一种畏惧感和高不可攀，高高在上的感觉。<br/><br/>16 “在我拍它们的时候，我从没有碰过它们。”Hamilton说，“但是感觉却像是碰到了它们，在抚摸它们。”<br/><br/>17 在斯德哥儿摩的一个祭品的清晰照片可能会非常迷人，但是却显得静止不动。也许很美丽，但是却平淡无奇。事实代替了气氛，每个人都对它伸手可及。<br/>考虑到将这些照片以“再生的方式进行制作”，今儿奇迹般地给了它们生命和声音，我们不禁会想到弗洛伊德. 弗洛伊德说过：“我们对离奇的分析，将我们带入了古老的宇宙万物有灵论，它的论点是世界上到处都有人的灵魂存在…<br/>任何让我们感到离奇的东西，都具备条件激起我们心中残存的万物有灵的精神活动，从而得到它们自身的表达”。这使我想到了照片本身的离奇效果。我们存在的时间要比它们长得多，但是当第一个摄影师将一个人的人像摄入相片的时候，当他看到人像与真人一摸一样，只是尺寸小了一点的时候，他该感到多么吃惊，多么的沮丧啊。这种能力简直是一种魔术。感觉简直是一种可以永远改变世界的活动，事实上它的确改变了世界。Benjamin在他的论文《微型摄影史》中曾经引用Karl Dauthendey描述制作第一张底片的时候的语言说：“第一次看到的时候，我们不相信自己的眼睛……我们看到这些清晰的人像的时候大吃一惊，我们认为这些相片上面小小的人像可以看到我们。”<br/>弗洛伊德在阐述“原始思维”的时候说：“现在，我们克服了这些思想，但是对于我们所相信的东西又不是十分确定，而固有的思想还是残存在我们的脑海中，攻击我们所确认的任何东西。”在这种固有的信仰之中，许多面孔的组合开始抬头，似乎有话要说。但是它们又沉默不语，毕竟它们只不过是照片，毕竟在现实中它们只是用木头制作成的东西。摄像机给它们造成了具有生命的假相，并且恢复了原来用来象征另一个世界的氛围。”<br/><br/>18 Roland Barthes 在他的Camera Lucida中说：在每一副摄影作品中，我们都可以遇到“归来的死者”。以前人们认为－现在还有人认为－死者可以通过某些媒介开口说话。而摄影为死者提供了一个真实而又具有图形特色的媒介。在Ann Hamilton的照片中，从来不具有生命的东西被赋予了生命。在看了这些照片的一部分以后，我们可能真的会怀疑它们到底是不是洋娃娃或者雕塑。知道了被摄的对象也不会使人感到失望。其目的在于表现这些雕塑，而不是欺骗我们自己。知道它们是祭坛上的器具以后，它们表现出另外一种神秘感，其中还带有一丝哀婉－人的灵魂是如何住在这些雕塑中的，为什么人们曾经认为神会通过这些人工制作的东西说话，甚至住在里面，在神消失了以后，现实是如何消失的，气息是如何消散的，而这些雕塑是如何从供奉它们的教堂中移到博物馆中让人欣赏而不是让人信奉的。在Hamilton的照片中那一瞬间，它们又回归到了它们原先在仪式中的存在状态，回到了它们最真实的生命中。<br/><br/><br/>劳伦斯•阿尔伯（Lawrence Raab）著有六本诗集，其中《我们之间互相不了解的事情》（1993）获得国家诗学奖，也是国家图书奖的最终入围作品。《可能的世界》（2000），以及最近的《可见的符号》：《最新作品与诗歌选集》（2003）。现任教于美国马萨诸塞州威廉斯顿威廉大学，教授文学和写作。<br/><br/><br/><br/>EIGHTEEN WAYS OF LOOKING <br/>AT ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY - FOUR PICTURES<br/>BY ANN HAMILTON<br/><br/>Lawrence Raab<br/><br/>1 What is it? A mouth – yes - but what sort of mouth? And whose? A person’s? Or could this be a corpse? Or could this be a corpse? Or a doll? Maybe a statue?<br/>And what would all these mouths, so close-up and blurredout, be saying-crying, whispering, imploring, shrieking? Or smiling silently. So many mouths caught in the act of being mysteriously expressive.<br/>When an image verges on the abstract, we soon catch hold of the mouth as a point of reference. Then we can identify teeth, or the shadow of a nose, sometimes an eye. It’s as if we were trying to figure something out.<br/>And if a certain expression looks alarming, and many do, that still doesn’t account for how disturbing the images appear as a group, which id why “What is it?” feels like the right first question, even when the answer seems obvious. What is it that’s behind what it seems to be?<br/><br/>2 “They’re like evidence,” a friend said,” evidence that without context we don’t know what to do with things.” The difficulty of interpreting a face we’re only partially partially able to see may remind us of how easily appearances can deceive us. Often we move closer how easily appearances can deceive us. Often we move closer to try to see something more clearly. But here we’re already uncomfortably close. We want to step back, look at the whole face, the body, then the space around it, and of course we can’t, though the blur suggests a need to adjust our perspective, and refocus. That would be a way of establishing context. Deprived of it, we’re more aware of the questions that have been raised, and the multiplying difficulties of our position. If this were a text, the pictures would be sentence fragments, suspended in the air, without any verbs to drive them forward, to make their actions apparent, their ideas knowable.<br/><br/>3 When the blur shifts some images toward the abstract, it isn’t a comfortable kind of abstraction. Instead, they always appear to be coming forward into focus – just not far enough. If they’re ambiguous, we don’t know the terms that would make them approachable – the shape, or context in which ambiguity would allow the disclosure of meaning.<br/>Nevertheless, there is value in ambiguity itself, as there isn’t in mere confusion, or careless the control of a creator, someone who , we hope , possesses a plan, and has therefore decided to forestall one kind of understanding in order to reveal another. Or perhaps we are meant to remain always about to understand.<br/><br/>4 In the pictures we take throughout our liver – call them, snapshots – clarity is what we’re after .The blurry photo is a disappointment, somebody’s mistake. Imagine a party, perhaps a wed-ding, everyone smiling, their arms around each other. the aim is to capture that moment, who was there and what they looked like. The picture memorializes the subject, and the photographer serves a mechanical function - mot so much shaping a vision as making sure everyone gets into the frame.<br/>lf the photographer then jiggles the camera the picture becomes the evidence or his error. The blur points mot to the intended subject but to the moment when the photograph was taken. Clarity is fixed, while the blur is a movement, the encoding of the temporal, albeit in this example as clumsiness.<br/>Of course we’re also used to the way blur functions as a designed effect. Through it the truths of certain moments - an athlete in motion, a soldier dying - are conveyed more immediately and effectively than precision, the blur of a moving automobile evokes power and speed, perhaps the exhilaration of the driver (what we would feel if we were to purchase that car).the crisp, detailed photo of the car by itself removes the element of time, the implied narrative of the pleasures of driving, and commits itself wholly to outward appearance.<br/>Blurring in a photograph - either as error or effect - nudges the ostensible subject aside to made us aware of the photographer’s act of looking, and the space in time when that looking took place. The blur prevents the image from separating itself from the moment of its making. It is an inscription of action， which the picture cannot contain，the suggestion of a continuing narrative beyond the frame， as well as a gesture toward the unrecoverable past.<br/><br/>5 What do we do with all these blurred mouths then? They’re not snapshots, and don’t attempt to refer to snapshots. The blur is clearly intentional, and works to create an aura of ambiguity. Yet this aura doesn’t coalesce into a sense an aura of ambiguity, yet this aura doesn’t coalesce into a sense of the photographer’s vision or presence so much as it feels like a kind of uncanny emanation from the faces themselves.<br/>“these images,” Ann Hamilton has said,” aren’t so much blurred as they are out of focus, and so they seem to me less about movement and more about closeness and farness, focus and proximity. What you see is the camera moving toward, or moving away, but never quite into focus, this seems more about memory and recall and incompleteness.”<br/>On some basic level what’s out of focus is blurred. But Hamilton points beyond the fact to the effect. The blur of the speeding car, the falling soldier, the hurtling body of the athlete - all work to conjure up a moment, and what it was like to see, or feel it. These images, on the other hand, don’t allow us access to time, at least mot that sense of ordinary, continuous, livable time. The movement toward and then back is still movement, but registers differently from movement across and away. Lf the latter is associated with narration (one thing after another), the former seems more interior (closer and closer, in and out), perhaps more speculative, more psychological(“memory and recall”), but in any case harder to define. Not confusing or obscure. But troubling, as if the strange were just about to become familiar, then didn’t.<br/><br/>6 “ Beauty and the Beast,” my wife said when l showed her several out – of - sequence shots .she was right: the lips in some looked lovely and sensuous; in others the gaping mouth and ragged teeth were grotesque. it was a story she naturally turned to， a tale that would enclose and explain them。 Given a context， the images could settle into place.<br/>Of course they refuse to comply. But if we must finally fail to control these images, our desires to organize, clarify, and understand are all part of those interpretive impulses Hamilton’s installations frequently invoke in order to question and complicate. Her aim isn’t to reject the viewer’s inclinations toward order, but to call greater and more interested attention to them, such recognitions might then make the process or thinking about meaning at least as valuable as the uncovering Or meaning itself.<br/><br/>7 If ’what is it?’ is the first question provoked by these pictures, the second is likely to have something to do with their emotional content. How should we respond to those feelings we assume - or imagine - are being conveyed?<br/>We all unconsciously rely upon our ability to read peoples’ faces. That some are able to conceal their emotions only proves the general case. The face is expressive, especially parts of it, most famously the eyes - windows on the soul, mirrors of the self, sparkling with pleasure, clouding over with distress, lit up with delight. Looking into the eyes of others we think we can see what they feel lovers gaze deep into each other’s eyes, which reflect the beloved, or well up with a blur or tears. l could see it in her eyes, someone says, his expression gave him away. Or else: his eyes were blank, or blind, or dead.<br/>How would the pictures look if they concentrated on eyes? more comforting, l think, less emotionally fraught. There’s something disorienting in switching our attention from the feature of the face we assume possesses revelatory power to the unstable, difficult, worrisome mouth.<br/>After all, the mouth does so much for us, and works so hard. Lt allows us to utter communicable noises, even if we quickly learn to distrust what we’re told, and turn to the eyes for unimpeded confirmation. To speak clearly requires mastering language. But a look - how we yearn to believe that a mere look might convey the truth we’re too tongue-tied to articulate! In Shakespeare’s comedies love at first sight avoids, at least for a while, the difficult intercession of speech. Orlando in As You Like It is struck dumb when he has the chance to speak to Rosalind.” What passion hangs these weights upon my tongue?” he asks himself. But Rosalind doesn’t blame him for his silence. But Rosalind doesn’t blame him for his silence. Both of them can see what they feel.<br/>The mouth lies, begs, confesses, and is overwhelmed. The eyes stare and reflect. The mouth opens and closes, It hides the tongue, and all the rest of the messy, complicated, literal and metaphorical interior. It leads deep into the body while the eyes remain contentedly fixed on the mind. The mouth is both presence and absence, now lips pressed together, now the space inside when the lips part. The mouth manages, and sometimes fails to manage, speech, food, erotic pleasure, breath itself, while the eyes gaze, or glaze over, or close. The mouth’s an assemblage of disparate parts - lips, tongue, teeth, the cavern of the throat beyond - which switch back and forth in importance depending upon the needs of the moment.<br/>The mouth tells us who is alive and who is dead, The eyes may calmly close, or remain fixed in a stare. But it’s the last breath we look for, and want to trust. “If that her breath will mist or stain the stone,” King Lear desperately says of the dead Cordelia,” Why then she lives.” He lets his eyes deceive him.” Do you see this? Look on her! Look! Her lips! / Look there, look there – “<br/><br/>8 A good friend of mine told me that all his life people - women especially - felt compelled by his presence as a listener because he looked them in the eye. This demonstrated concern, attentiveness, interest, sympathy. Whatever the emotion, it made him present, because of the way his gaze met theirs - deeply, with concentration. ”But I was never looking at their eyes,” he told me.” I always looked at peoples’ mouths. I’m looking at yours mow.”<br/><br/>9 This book confronts us with an excess of mouths. Sometimes there’s an eye visible, as if to remind us of what we’re not really concerned with, the kinds of metaphors we can’t turn to, or should rethink.” I always thought.” my friend told me,’ that my mouth would give me away .Never my eyes.”<br/><br/>10 “The teeth are an issue, it seems to me,” another friend observed. ”In what way?” I asked. He looked closer.” I don’t know,” he said.<br/><br/>11 Uncanny, we sometimes think about a particular kind of strangeness. Déeà vu. Arriving at a place we’ve never been and feeling we know it, that if we were to open a certain door we wouldn’t be surprised by what we’d find. Or suddenly suspecting that a doll or a statue has moved, perhaps opened its eyes, when of course in reality that could never happen. The uncanny event puts quotation marks around “reality.” undermining our trust in its stability. And calling into question our assumption that we know the rules that govern our world.<br/>Sigmund Freud’s brilliant, messy, conflicted essay of 1919.”The’uncanny.” considers a variety of interconnected ways of thinking about and defining its subject. Freud suggests that one kind of uncanny sensation arises from a moment that feels simultaneously strange and familiar, creating an unsettling awareness of what we should know, or once knew, but have forgotten, outgrown, or repressed.” An uncanny effect.” Freud writes.” is often and easily produced by effacing the distinction between imagination and reality, such as when something that that we have hitherto regarded as imaginary appears before us in reality, or when a symbol takes over the full functions and significance of the thing it symbolizes,”<br/>One of the emblematic instances of the uncanny in literature is doubt about whether an apparently animate being really is alive, or whether something that shouldn’t be alive in fact is - a doll. for example. or an automaton. In literature the uncanny depends upon the creation of a sense of interpretative uncertainty. first for the characters, then more profoundly for the rules of the story are(what its context is, in what terms it should be read),the writer is to maintain this “frustration” in a way that is engaging, and eventually illuminating.<br/>Interpretive confusion returns us to our initial response to these pictures - our uncertainty about what we are looking at - a person, or a doll, statue, or other work of art. I don’t know how this sense of intellectual uncertainty will play out over the course of more than a hundred such images. Indeed, there’s something a little uncanny about trying to write about the effect of a sequence of pictures I’ve seen only small parts of. What am I accurately anticipating? What am I conjuring up or reading in? But this tension between the work itself and the viewer’s imagination can be a powerful strategy, creating a situation in which the progressive discoveries of the artist are later reenacted by the observer.<br/><br/>12 “you try so hard to figure it out.” my wife said.” What does this mean? And you’re stopped. Well, not stopped, but frustrated. But not frustrated. exactly. Something else. What are they looking at? You wonder. And where are they? They all seem to be coming out of the same moment.”<br/><br/>13 Describing the process that produced these images feels like a kind of betrayal, a way of dispelling the uncanny. Finally, however, I think that knowing certain facts gives the images a different kind of presence, and one that is no less compelling, provocative, or unsettling.<br/>The subjects are carved wooden figures in several medieval altarpieces located in the Gothic Historiska Museet in Stockholm. They were photographed using a single chip surveillance video camera the size of a quarter. Holding it between her index finger and thumb. Hamilton slowly moved her hand around the mouths of the figures. watching the progress on a small monitor to the side.<br/>The process itself is richly metaphorical - the tiny camera like a pencil invisibly inscribing the air around the figures, or like the pen a reader might pick up to jot down thoughts in the margins of a book. The hand contains the eye that follows the curves of the mouth. Is the motion of the hand “a futile coaxing of the mouth to sound?” Hamilton wonders. “The still images a futile attempt to see the voice”<br/>The final images were then selected from the videotape in a process interestingly parallel to the act of filming. Just as the hand once moved through the air around those carved mouths, later, scrolling through the footage, Hamilton allowed the hand’s rhythms to make the initial choices. The first process was” one of proximity in space, the second one of circling back and forth within time.” Those frames that” held neither too much nor too little information” were then enlarged and printed.<br/>What exactly should we call them? Photographs? Stills from a film? They’re both, of course, but neither exactly. Our sense of what it means to pose for as well as to take a photograph doesn’t really apply here, just as the eye doesn’t stare through a lens, but off to the side, while the tiny camera circles and shadows the face .The hand’s gestures create the stream of video images. The monitor displays them in real time, but movement itself conceals the individual pictures that later will be found there.<br/>In Camera Lucida Roland Barthes writes,” I project the present photograph’s immobility upon the past shot, and it is this arrest which constitutes the pose.” When the photograph is” animated and becomes cinema,” its essence - its life as that particular moment of stillness - “deteriorates” for Barthes, since in the photograph” something has posed in front of the tiny hole and has remained there forever (that is my feeling) ; but in cinema, something has passed in front of this same tiny hole: the pose is swept away and denied by the continuous series of images…..”Hamilton’s images seem to occupy a middle ground between the “pose” and the “continuous series.” Or perhaps they claim nothing as fixed as “ground,” and instead exist as a kind of vibration between the illusion of the pose and the illusion of continuous time.<br/>“The project of these images,” Hamilton says,” is to “return time,” or grant time to those immobile statues…At thirty frames per second, each frame is a singular moment, but they aren’t moments we can really see until we take apart or separate the structure of the basis of the meaning.” One might also say that separation is the condition of the viewer of these images, and a sign of this is a question like,’ What is it? ’ Separation from both the source of the images (the altarpieces, their histories and narrative) and the nature of the process(stills drawn from the videotape), locates the viewer in a position of unease and worry, as well as fascination and wonderment . But knowing about the carvings or about the way the images were produced, finally – and appropriately - doesn’t feel like a conclusive explanation as much as a complication, an additional set of questions, a continuing investigation .<br/><br/>14 This intricate” act of making,” Hamilton says,” might revive these wooden statues and return them from the dead, or give them voice.” Of course she can’t actually give them voice, so they could speak aloud and for themselves, but she can suggest that possibility.<br/>“The mouths are open in some cases to speak,” she says,” and yet they are silent. And so it is the potential of speaking - of anything being spoken - the potential of having meaning, that is registered.” What’s unheard remains unheard, but the silence has been given life. The images seem charged, with a kind of imminence that won’t give way to revelation, as if that moment of possibility just before speech were endlessly extended. The value of ambiguity is the pressure it places on the viewer. The blur is its emblem, resonant but impenetrable. Through the blur the aura is restored.<br/><br/>15 But what, in fact, is “aura” ?In one sense it’s presence, that particular atmosphere or quality that, Webster’s explains,” seems to arise from and surround a person or thing. ”The example is;” enveloped in an aura of grandeur.”<br/>The Oxford English Dictionary is more consciously eloquent - “a subtle emanation or exhalation or exhalation from any substance. e.g. the aroma of blood. the odour of flowers, etc,” But in the worlds of philosophy and literary criticism the idea of “aura” is securely linked to Walter Benjamin.” What is aura, actually?” Benjamin asks in his essay,” Little History of photography.” And he answers:” A strange weave of space and time: the unique appearance or semblance of distance, no matter how close it may be. While at rest on a summer’s noon, to trace a range of mountains on the horizon, or a branch that throws its shadow on the observer, until the moment or the hour become part of their appearance - this is what it means to breathe the aura of those mountains, that branch.”<br/>Benjamin’s lyrical response to his own question suggests that to sense the aura is somehow to conflate time and space. The moment or hour becomes part of the appearance of a range of mountains, or the shadow of a branch. But Benjamin makes things difficult by defining his subject through sentence fragments that represent movement(first tracing, then breathing).Tracing connects with that” weave of space and time.” and then becomes the act of looking that results in uniting the thing with the particular moment in which it is apprehended. Then the observer breathes in the aura of “those mountains, that branch” as if it were life itself. Looking becomes both a creative action and a physical, bodily function - eye and mouth working together.<br/>Aura, for Benjamin , is importantly associated with uniqueness, the work of art still possessed” the authority of the object.”” We know,” Benjamin writes in “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” ”that the earliest art works originated in the service of art with reference to its aura is never entirely separated from its ritual function.” This is that complicated” weave of time and space.” When the image functioned at full force within its tradition, when as the object of a cult it was suffused with meaning, however close a person might literally stand, the object remained importantly and essentially distant, unapproachable, exactly and only itself.<br/><br/>16 “I never actually physically touch the statues when I film them,” Hamilton says .”But it feels like touch - it seems like a caress.”<br/><br/>17 A clear photograph of one of the altarpieces in Stockholm would be fascinating but static. Beautiful, perhaps, but never uncanny. Aura would be replaced by fact. Anyone could approach it.<br/>Thinking of the “act of making” these pictures as one of “revival,” and therefore as a kind of magical restoration of the sense of life and voice, may usefully return us to Freud.” Our analysis of the instances of the uncanny,” Freud writes,” has led us back to the old, animistic conception of the universe, which was characterized by the idea that the world was peopled with the spirits of human beings….and everything which now strikes us as ’uncanny ’fulfills the condition of stirring those vestiges of animistic mental activity within us and bringing them to expression I am reminded here of the uncanny effect of photography itself. We’ve outgrown it, but how surprised, how unnerved the first photographers must have felt when they captured a person on a piece of paper, exactly as he looked, only smaller. That ability would have seemed magical. It would have felt like an act that could permanently alter the world, as indeed it did. In his” Little History of photography,” Benjamin quotes Karl Dauthendey describing the making of the first daguerreotype:” We didn’t trust ness of these human images, and believed that the little tiny faces in the pictures could see us…..<br/>“Nowadays,” Freud writes about” primitive ” thinking ,”we have surmounted such ways of thought; but we do not feel quite sure of our new set of beliefs, and the old ones still exist within us ready to seize upon any confirmation .”So a congregation of faces rises out of those old beliefs, as if to speak. But they’re silent, since they are, after all, pictures, and since in reality they are made of wood. The camera has granted them the illusion of life, and restored the aura they once possessed as emblems that pointed to another world.<br/><br/>18 In every photograph, Roland Barthes writes in Camera Lucida, we encounter” the return of the dead.” Once - and for some people still - the dead might speak through a medium. Then photography provided the dead with both a literal and a figurative medium. In Ann Hamilton’s pictures ,what was never alive returns as life. We may suspect, after viewing a number of these images, that they actually are of a doll, or a piece of sculpture But knowing the real subject doesn’t render them disappointing. The aim wasn’t to trick us, but to illuminate them. Identified as figures from the altarpiece, they suggest a different mystery, to which now may be added a sense of pathos—how the ghost of the human inhabited the carving, how once it was thought that the gods themselves lived in or spoke through such artifacts, how that reality has disappeared, that aura fallen away, as the gods have vanished, and the carvings moved from cathedral to museum, where they can be admired, but no longer believed. In Hamilton’s pictures, for a moment, they are lured back into their ritual existence, their truest lives.<br/><br/><br/>Lawrence Raab is the author of six collections of poems, including What We Don’t Know About Each Other (1993), winner of the National poetry series, and a finalist for the National Book Award, The probable World (2000),and most recently Visible Signs: New and Selected poems(2003).He teaches literature and writing at Williams College in Williamstown, Massachusetts. USA.</div></th></tr><tr class="tr1 r_one"><th colspan="2" style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 1.5%; VERTICAL-ALIGN: bottom; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px;"><div class="fontother tipad"><span style="FLOAT: right;"><a href="javascript:scroll(0,0)">顶端</a>
QQ空间
腾讯微博
腾讯朋友
分享
收藏
顶
踩
提升卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡