English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper analyzes how the artistic images and sexualized artistic subjects in Chinese scar art works represented by Father, The Maples and Youth, etc., changed with state ideology in the early 1980s. This paper points out that art works always “exist” in the society, so they are not only text waiting for interpretation, but also the carrier and object of social practice. In the process of subjectification, narration and representation of the gender differences consolidates the existing symbolic order unconsciously. On this basis, the paper further explores the close relationship between the artist subject and the mainstream ideology of the country in shaping and referring each other. Frederick Jameson vividly called the 1960s as the “Long 60’s”. The Cultural Revolution in China was undoubtedly an important component and representative event of the great “Global 60’s”. As a reflection and rebellion against the collective experience of the Cultural Revolution, a series of avant-garde art movements emerged in the early 1980s in Chinese Mainland, which are regarded as the origin of Chinese contemporary art by the academic circle. The cultural and political nature behind this trend is just as Li Xianting, an art critic, puts “The revival of art is not a revolution of art itself, that is, language paradigm, but a movement of mind emancipation [1].” From the perspective of historical witnesses, Li points out the main axis of artistic ideology that runs through the post-cultural revolution era. “All of these are driven by a rebellious mentality, and the core of the change is social consciousness and politics [1].” Li’s point of view reminds us that the beginning of Chinese avant-garde art is closely related to the change of state ideology. The vicissitudes of national destiny and the turning point of national history have become part of the artist’s personal life and memory, which not only possesses individuality, but also possesses collectivity and constructs the cultural and political subject of the 1980s dialectically and interactively. Reproduction of the “Invisible” As an art trend of speaking the history and memory of the times, “scar art” originated in the late 1970s from the retrospect and summary of the traumatic experiences in the Cultural Revolution. Like the concept of “scar literature”, scar art generally refers to the trend of thought and the atmosphere of artistic creation in the early 1980s, rather than a rigorous genre definition. As a linguistic act and discourse practice, “naming” aims to establish a clear referential relationship between the signifier and the signified. The term “scar literature” is originally used as a derogatory term to express negative meanings along with terms such as “accusatory literature” and “virtueless literature”. The word is originated from Lu Xinhua's novel Scar published in Wenhui Dalily in August 1978. The emergence of this kind of works immediately triggered a discussion on the praise, accusatory and tragic writing of socialist literature. The formation process of scar works vividly reflects the complex conflict of artistic ideas and ideological disputes in the post-Cultural Revolution era. In the existing literature of Chinese contemporary art history, Luo Zhongli's painting Father (Figure 1) is often recognized as the origin of scar art. As Li says, “The so-called scar is the feeling of being hurt inside. At that time, people all painted big figures, those ‘tall, big, perfect’ figures. However, Luo draws those ‘nobodies’. Later, the officials scolded Luo for painting those ‘small, suffering, old’ figures. These officials summarized well. The drawing of those of small figures, their misery life and backward appearance, is aim to against those ‘tall, big, perfect’ and ‘red, radiant, bright’ figures [2]. ”

Trial from Hostages? Scar Art and the Break of History