| 摘要: | 陳水財（b.1946）與李俊賢（1957-2019）為1970年代末起活躍於南臺灣的藝術家，以繪畫等平面作品為主要的創作媒材。他們的創作常被賦予表現在地意象、由邊陲意識出發等評價，尤其在1990年代他們共同參與的「台灣計劃」更被視為前述精神的體現，而他們對藝術計畫的宣言也展現出欲描繪時代風景的企圖。觀看他們在「台灣計劃」中的作品，可發現不少「工業」形象，而回顧兩位藝術家早期（1970年代末至1980年代）的作品，亦可見到對工業景觀的表現，「工業」儼然成為他們表現「風景」題材不可忽視的重要元素。過往對於兩位藝術家作品中的工業意象的研究，多視其為高雄地區重工業城市特質的體現，並與地方藝術潮流「高雄黑畫」脈絡相聯繫。然而這些論述多由地方藝術史的角度出發，其與臺灣整體藝術史的關係則較少著墨，且「台灣計劃」中顯著的拼貼特質也僅止於視覺風格的描述，關於技法與題材的關聯性則未見深入的探討。另一方面，帶有與主流抗衡意味的「邊陲」論述，亦未詳述其與時代風景的關係。
本文欲以兩位藝術家為例，研究「工業」與風景的關係及時代意義。聚焦1990年代初他們各自繪畫與「台灣計劃」作品的對照，探討其中折射出的視野與觀點以及時代氛圍的聯想，並透過於此重新審視圍繞在他們周邊的關鍵字折射出的意識，期盼勾勒出1990年代臺灣「風景」的表現的一個參照面向。
第一章首先回顧「工業」在臺灣藝術史上所折射出的觀點及意識，並延伸討論兩位藝術家早期作品中的工業景觀；此外，亦從媒材特質切入，爬梳拼貼在臺灣藝術史上的流變，以及兩位藝術家如何繼承與革新拼貼手法的運用。第二章聚焦陳水財1990年代初的工業景觀繪畫，探討其繪畫語言與工業主題之間的關係、工業景觀與當時藝壇「世紀末」氛圍的關聯性，以及他在「台灣計劃」中如何透過相片拼貼處理鄉村即將工業化的景觀，進一步觀看他如何透過工業意象投射對近未來的憂慮。第三章以李俊賢1990年代的作品為探討對象，從他對軍事設施與碉堡遺址的繪畫出發，探討工業意象往軍事、歷史領域拓展的潛能。並研究他在「台灣計劃」中如何以拼貼呈現出常民生活中工業地景的視野。;Chen Shui-Tsai (b. 1946) and Lee Jinn-Shyan (1957-2019) were artists active in southern Taiwan since the late 1970s, primarily creating works in painting. Their works are often praised for embodying local imagery and stemming from a marginal consciousness. Particularly, their participation in the Taiwan Project in the 1990s is seen as a manifestation of this spirit, with their artistic statements reflecting an ambition to depict the landscape of their era. Examining their works in the Taiwan Project reveals numerous “industrial” images, and looking back at their early works (from the late 1970s to the 1980s) also shows a focus on “Industrial Landscape”. “Industry” has evidently become a significant element in their landscape paintings. Previous research on the industrial imagery in their works has largely viewed it as a reflection of Kaohsiung′s heavy industrial city characteristics and connected it to the local art movement “Kaohsiung Black Painting.” However, these discussions have mostly taken a local art history perspective, with less attention to their relationship with the overall history of Taiwanese art. Additionally, the distinctive collage characteristics in the Taiwan Project have been described mainly in terms of visual style, without in-depth exploration of the relationship between technique and subject matter. Furthermore, the marginal discourse, which suggests a resistance to the mainstream, has not elaborated on its connection to the landscape of the era.
This thesis aims to study, through the examples of the two artists discussed, the relationship between “industry” and landscapes, and their significance in the contemporary era. Focusing on their individual paintings and works from the Taiwan Project in the early 1990s, it explores the perspectives and associations with the era′s atmosphere reflected in these works, and re-examines the consciousness suggested by the keywords surrounding them. The goal is to outline a reference framework for understanding the representation of “landscape” in Taiwan during the 1990s.
The first chapter reviews the perspectives and consciousness reflected by “industry” in Taiwanese art history and extends the discussion to the “Industrial Landscape” in the early works of the two artists. Additionally, it examines the evolution of collage in Taiwanese art history and how these two artists inherited and innovated in the use of collage techniques. The second chapter focuses on Chen Shui-Tsai’s “Industrial Landscape” paintings from the early 1990s, exploring the relationship between his pictorial language and industrial themes, the connection between “Industrial Landscape” and the “fin-de-siècle” atmosphere in the art scene at the time, and how he used photo collages in the Taiwan Project to depict rural landscapes on the verge of industrialization, projecting concerns about the near future through industrial imagery. The third chapter discusses Lee Jinn-Shyan’s works from the 1990s, starting with his paintings of military facilities and bunker ruins, examining the potential for industrial imagery to expand into military and historical realms. It also investigates how he used collage in the Taiwan Project to present views of “Industrial Landscape” in everyday life. |
