参展作品

伊利亚 & 艾米利亚 · 卡巴科夫 Ilya&Emilia Kabakov

屋顶下的天堂

The Paradise under the ceiling 1997-2009

门，呈 90 度的木板架，灯，塑料动物，房间 300x420x250 厘米 room with door, 2 wooden shelf 90° , 8 lamps, plastic animals 300 x 420 x 250 cm unique work

图片来源:常青画廊，San Gimignano / Beijing / Les Moulins / Habana Courtesy: GALLERIA CONTINUA, San Gimignano / Beijing / Les Moulins / Habana

摄影:Ela Bialkowska Photo by: Ela Bialkowska

伊利亚 & 艾米利亚 · 卡巴科夫 Ilya&Emilia Kabakov

屋顶下的天堂

The Paradise under the ceiling 1997-2009

门，呈 90 度的木板架，灯，塑料动物，房间 300x420x250 厘米

room with door, 2 wooden shelf 90° , 8 lamps, plastic animals 300 x 420 x 250 cm unique work

图片来源:常青画廊，San Gimignano / Beijing / Les Moulins / Habana Courtesy: GALLERIA CONTINUA, San Gimignano / Beijing / Les Moulins / Habana

摄影:Ela Bialkowska Photo by: Ela Bialkowska

伊利亚 & 艾米利亚 · 卡巴科夫 Ilya&Emilia Kabakov

诗人，单簧管与音管

The Poet, Clarinet and The Pipe

2009-2017

行为，装置

performance, installation

伊利亚 & 艾米利亚 · 卡巴科夫作品阐释

格罗伊斯:人们对“演戏”一词的使用往往带有贬义:例如，当我们说某人像演戏一样，那么我们是想说这个人在现实生活中的行为像在舞台上一样做作。

卡巴科夫:现代主义的发展不可避免的对舞台戏剧表演的批评方式提出了要求，批评者应当是冷静的观察者，而冷静的观察者则应当由观众担任。大多数的观众应当具有清醒的记忆和清晰的思路，他们在评价艺术作品时，应当以其他的艺术作品、档案、史料作为参考。这要求他们还与艺术客体保持一定的距离，这里我们所说的艺术客体具有评估客体的性质，绝非是消费客体。 就剧院本身的性质来说，它应当是朦胧的，可以捕捉想象力的，可以像露天体育场或运动场一样，让人们陷入疯狂的地方。换句话说，人们不再是冷静清醒的专业观察者，而是陷入惊艳和战栗。

此外，某个特别类型的剧院有这样的要求。然而，到底什么是剧院在剧院，我们坐在座位上，看着舞台的表演时，会发现我们无意识的陷入了某种事物，我们丧失了理解能力，我们失去了 自身的意愿和反应能力。格罗伊斯:是的，但是对戏剧的批评也应当是一种剧院内部的批评。首先，梅耶荷德和布莱希特先后尝试在剧院内，利用角色表演消除观众的直接认知，然后创造出一个与剧院距离更远的分析评价距离。从这个角度来说，对我而言，对戏剧的批评忽略了剧院本身的发展。剧院的种类有很多中。其中既包含你所说的那种，但也有那种试图与观众建立不同的联系，或迫使观众与他们建立不同联系的剧院。

卡巴科夫:是的，但是我们都十分了解布莱希特风格和梅耶荷德风格的剧院内批评的虚伪和自嘲，这种批评只不过是同一剧院上演的另一个剧情罢了。没有一个导演曾经放弃过剧院本身和剧院内部所能产生的响。他们是改革家，但却是致力于增强剧院本身影响力的改革家。对于布莱希特和其他人来说，超出剧院本身的界限是不可想象的。他们都想让剧院不仅仅“捕捉”观众，不仅仅对观众产生无意识的或不理性的影响，他们想让剧院具备别的功能:给观众带去智力上的影响。

博依斯 · 格罗伊斯

Groys: the concept of theatricality is often used in a negative sense: when we, for example, say that a person carries himself theatrically, that he behaves in real life as though he were on stage. This is really what Michael Fried had in mind

Kabakov: the reproach of theatricality cast at the installation is conditioned by the imperative of modernism that demands the position of a cold observer, the position that the viewer is supposed to occupy. Most of all the viewer must possess a sober memory, a sober consciousness, and he must evaluate the work of art in the context of other works of art, in the context of an archive, library, etc; that is, the viewer is supposed to be distanced in relation to the artistic object. the artistic object in this case functions like an object of evaluation, but by no means as an object of consumption. The theater, by its very nature, is a space of a certain type of obscuration, a seizing of the imagination, a kind of reveling-like in a stadium or a sports hall, etc. In other words, instead of being a cold and sober intellectual observer, a person turns out to be astounded, shaken.

Moreover, the very specific nature of theater demands this. After all, what is theater? Theater is that place where, sitting in the seat and looking at the stage, we find ourselves drawn into something without our consent, we lose the ability to comprehend, we lose the will and capability for reflection.Groys: Yes，but yet this criticism of theatricality was also an internal-theatrical criticism. Firstly, Meyerhold, and then Brecht, attempted in their theaters to eliminate the direct identification of the viewer with the heroes and to create a more distanced analytical position in relation to the theater as such. From this perspective, the accusation of theatricality, it seems to me, in a familiar sense ignores the development of the theater itself. There are also different kinds of theater. It can be just like you just described it, but it can also be the kind that tries to occupy a different position in relation to the viewer, and to force the viewer to occupy a different position in relation to itself 

Kabakov: Yes, but we know full well the hypocrisy and self-irony of the Brechtian and Meyerholdian positions reflection inside the theater-that is just one more incident of the very same theater. Not one of these directors renounces the power of the theater or the power inside the theater. They were reformers, but reformers with the goal of achieving an even stronger influence of the theater. To step beyond the bounds of the theater was unthinkable to Brecht and to others, they all wanted to add yet another component to the theater besides the 'capturing’ of the viewer, besides to the unconscious or irrational influence it exerts over him: intellectual influence in addition to all of that, and not at all in place of these other things.

Boris Groys

伊利亚&艾米利亚·卡巴科夫（1933）

卡巴科夫曾是莫斯科观念艺术家团体中的一员，他们在苏联官方艺术系统之外工作。他们所有的工作都是根据展览空间，社会环境等要求进行创作。如今，他们是公认为20世纪末最重要的俄罗斯艺术家。他们装置作品对后斯大林的俄罗斯产生了极大的影响，因此乌托邦这一概念时常出现在他们的作品之中。曾多次参加卡塞尔文献展、威尼斯双年展和惠特妮双年展，并于诸如美国纽约MoMA，华盛顿Hirshhorn Museum博物馆，荷兰阿姆斯特丹Stedelijk Museum等举办个展

Ilya & Emilia Kabakov (1933)

Kabakov was part of a group of Conceptual artists in Moscow who worked outside the official Soviet art system. All their work was collaborative, in different proportions according to the specific project involved. Today they are recognised as the most important Russian artists to have emerged in the late 20th century. Their installations speak as much about conditions in post-Stalinist Russia as they do about the human condition universally. Utopia is a major theme in their work.

《安仁双年展》开幕现场直播由“在艺APP”特别支持，点击下方“阅读原文”链接即可订阅收看。