英美術館驚現希特勒私家藏畫 由德畫家創作

來源：新聞午報

英國國家美術館日前發現，館藏的一幅油畫竟曾是納粹元首阿道夫·希特勒的私家收藏。它由德國著名宮廷畫家老盧卡斯·克拉納赫創作，美術館正進一步搜集該油畫的相關資料。

這幅名為《丘比特向維納斯訴苦》的油畫名稱用拉丁文標注，是克拉納赫1512年創作的。雖是復制品，但仍然非常珍稀。熱衷收藏希特勒遺物的普林茨·施瓦茨博士在希特勒早年的相冊中首先發現了關于這幅油畫的照片，其中一張能清楚地看到，這幅畫被陳列在希特勒私人藝術館中。這本相冊是希特勒私人圖書館中的藏品，如今已被轉送到美國國會圖書館中收藏。希特勒分別擁有一個館藏1200卷圖書的私人圖書館和一個藝術館。英國國家美術館已著手調查這幅油畫被希特勒收藏的具體時間。據悉，1963年，國家美術館從紐約的希特曼兄弟手中買入該畫，但1909年至1945年間，該畫不知去向。美術館認為，希特勒很可能是在1933年至1945年間通過不合適途徑獲得該畫的。

拍賣場上 百花齊放

‧讀者文摘 2008/03/25

【撰文／SONIA KOLESNIKOV-JESSOP】

當時林壁興才三十八歲，在貿易公司上班。那天他陪着公司總經理前往新加坡手工藝中心，來到陳文希的畫廊，準備買幾幅畫裝飾新辦公室。早在三十年前，陳文希就是夙負盛名的傳統水墨畫大師，以高超手法融合了西方繪畫觀念與中國水墨技巧。

林壁興的上司選了幾幅傳統風格的水墨畫，林壁興自己挑了一幀較具現代感的小幅作品，主題是水墨蓑羽鶴，以立體主義風格呈現。

「這幅畫在陳文希的作品中還算便宜，所以選了它。」林壁興回憶往事，呵呵笑道：「不過還是花了我五百元新加坡幣(約美金三百三十元)，在當時可是相當大的數目。」雖然林壁興只因「喜歡」而買畫，但這筆投資相當值得──最近的一場拍賣會上，陳文希一幅水墨畫的成交價高達一萬二千五百美元。

林壁興也萬萬料想不到，過去三年來，亞洲藝術家的作品竟然炙手可熱。蘇富比公司在二○○六年拍賣的亞洲藝術家作品，總金額高達七千零三十萬美元，比起二 ○○五年增加將近四倍，且為二○○四年熱潮興起前的二十五倍。中國大陸藝術家的作品尤其水漲船高，讓其他地區望塵莫及；他們過去只能為宣傳服務，談不上什麼報酬，如今的行情卻在亞洲市場名列前茅，在全球當代藝術市場也令人刮目相看。

著名中國藝術家徐冰說：「我這一代原本對藝術品市場沒什麼認識。我們從小就深信，藝術只是宣傳工具。」徐冰現年五十二歲，長居紐約。當年他初出茅廬，畫的是毛澤東肖像版畫。

一直到一九九○年代末期，像徐冰這樣的版畫家，同一件作品通常都只印兩幅，一幅參加畫展，一幅自己保留。他們創作完全是為了展出，並不在意展覽結束後作品的去處。

這位觀念藝術家要歷經十年光陰才體認到他的創作身價。徐冰第一場大型個展「天書」於一九八八年登場。他花了一年時間，用梨木雕刻四千多個自創的方塊字，印在幾百冊大書和古代經卷式卷軸上。一位美國收藏家買了一卷四冊，只花了一百三十美元。但在二○○五年的一場拍賣會上，其中一冊《天書》以十四萬八千二百美元拍出。

裝置藝術家林天苗說：「實在想不到中國藝術品發生這麼快速的變化，這麼地欣欣向榮。」幾年前，她根本想不到自己的作品可以賣到今天的價格。

這股風潮從一九八○年代開始興起。當時正逢理想主義風行全中國，文化大革命黑暗年代已逝，新生代藝術家期待為復興中華文化盡一分心力。

上海香格納畫廊創辦人何浦林憶述：「那時候的藝術家滿懷熱忱，勇於實驗創新，這些特質在『中國現代藝術大展』表現得淋漓盡致。」

一九八九年，「中國現代藝術大展」於北京中國美術館舉行，是第一場以中國當代藝術為主題的大型展覽，展出流派風格各異。其中有幾項表演藝術甚至被人視為離經叛道(例如用槍射擊一具裝置藝術作品)，導致展覽屢次被公安局強迫關閉。

就在同一年，天安門事件爆發。中國新世代藝術家的精神也銷聲匿跡。

天安門事件落幕後，藝壇蕭瑟。藝術家以北京為中心，倚賴外交官、企業家夫人、新聞記者支持贊助。何浦林說：「不少藝術家遷居海外，在紐約與巴黎落腳。」

二○○六年，曾梵志的《面具1999 No. 3》在一場拍賣會中創下八十一萬六千四百美元的天價。他年輕時也曾上北京闖蕩，結果連展出作品都有困難。

曾梵志追憶當時情形：「展覽還沒開始，就有人上門說是有問題，不准辦展覽。他們不明講哪一幅畫出事，只拿消防安全法規之類的理由當幌子，而且往往開展前一個小時才通知。」曾梵志早期畫作經常描繪醫院與肉品市場的血腥場景，那是他家附近常見的景象；但官員質疑這些血淋淋的畫面是影射政治。他回想當時心情：「我嚇壞了。」

當年藝術家的日子確實很不好過，林天苗也難以忘懷：「展覽只能在自己住處舉行，時間不過幾個小時。當天開幕，當天閉幕，偷偷摸摸。」

天安門事件陰影籠罩一九九○年代，藝術家惴惴不安，而且找不到買家，只有香港幾家畫廊還舉辦大型展覽。何浦林說：「對於大部分國家而言，尤其美國，一九八九年後的中國是化外之地；中國當代藝術也乏人問津。」

突然間，情勢丕變。由於經濟突飛猛進，國民所得節節高升，中國成為全球傳播媒體焦點，形象轉為正面，世人對中國的人事物無不好奇，中國藝術品市場從此一飛沖天。

二○○四年，蘇富比在香港舉辦第一場當代中國藝術品拍賣會，買家反應非常踴躍。

蘇富比亞洲及澳洲地區副主席司徒河偉說：「情況之熱烈出乎我們意料，顯然這是一個潛力無窮的市場。不只香港，許多地方的買家都躍躍欲試。」蔡國強的《為龍年所作的計劃No. 3》運用古代中國人發明的火藥創造出一幅「畫作」，以十一萬五千六百八十六美元成交；岳敏君的《向日葵》以他最具代表性的笑臉圖像為主題，也賣出七萬七千一百二十四美元的好價錢。

二○○七年四月，蘇富比復於香港舉行亞洲當代藝術拍賣會，司徒河偉親自主鎚。當天會場人滿為患，主辦單位臨時加了好幾張座椅。那天的成交總值是五千二百八十萬美元，創下新高。眾所矚目的徐悲鴻油畫《放下你的鞭子》以九百二十萬美元拍出， 更打破中國繪畫以往的紀錄。

中國藝術家作品數量與價格步步高升，買家背景也不同以往。蘇富比中國當代藝術部主管林家如說：「二○○四年我們在香港舉行第一次拍賣會，只提供五十件作品；買家有七成來自歐美國家，亞洲買家只占了三成。第二年，歐美和亞洲的買家平分秋色。到了二○○七年，亞洲買家占了四分之三。」

買家背景的轉變，反映了中國與亞洲其他地區經濟的快速發展；年輕一代的企業家快速累積財富，有閒錢大手筆購買名車、房地產、藝術品。司徒河偉說：「這類收藏家往往選購與他們同一個年代且能產生共鳴的作品，而非緬懷過去。」

歐美買家偏愛政治意味濃厚、普普藝術風格的作品，但中國買家青睞新寫實主義，陳丹青(以描繪西藏的鄉村、山水與牧民而知名)與王沂東、陳逸飛都是這個流派的佼佼者。

林家如說：「這一代中國買家在文革中成長，因此特別喜愛新寫實主義藝術家。他們的作品容易理解，主題環繞中國風情，例如鄉野美景或傳統的內地生活。」

買家爭相收購亞洲作品蔚然成風，藝術家與經紀人多樂見其成。但也有人擔心炒作風氣太盛，未來恐怕引發危機。林天苗說：「買家有兩種：一是投資型，收購之後很快就脫手；另一種則是真正的藝術愛好者。很不幸，許多買家收購藝術品憑的是人云亦云，而不是眼光獨到。」

此外，今天的市場雖是欣欣向榮，為中國藝術家帶來可觀財富，許多藝壇人士卻另有所見。曾梵志說：「我很擔心，因為大家關注的是拍賣價格，而不是藝術家或作品本身。有些藝術家為了金錢而創作，這一點我不敢苟同；我的許多同行也是這個看法。藝術家不能以賺錢為終極目標，應該努力創造有靈性、有理念的作品。創作時如果只想到金錢，作品一定有問題。」

目前不僅中國藝術家作品價格屢創新高，其他亞洲國家，如印度、日本、韓國的藝術市場也交易熱絡。司徒河偉說：「我個人覺得，在技巧上，有些韓國、日本的藝術家比中國藝術家更有意思，讓人眼睛一亮，只不過他們沒有『中國』這個因素推波助瀾。」

頂尖藝術家的行情持續發燒，但許多後起之秀的作品價格平易近人，說不定就是明日的徐冰或曾梵志。林壁興身為藝術愛好者的經驗之談是：「長江後浪推前浪，永遠會有精彩絕倫的新一代藝術家出現，而且作品價格不會太昂貴。收藏家不必迷信藝術家的名氣，要買，就買真正能夠感動你的作品。」

他強調：「作品價格不貴並不代表價值不高；說不定這位藝術家不鳴則已，一鳴驚人。」

【讀者文摘2008年3月號】

奇美博物館展品更新 畢卡索創作受矚目

記者吳俊鋒／仁德報導

為迎接新春，位於台南縣的奇美博物館首度展出許多珍貴藝術品，包含彩繪、雕塑等，奇美表示，這次更換展品的規格不小，有六十餘件新的藝術品首度亮相，其中又以畢卡索的盤畫、陶板等創作最受矚目，不少民眾指名參觀，展品中亦包含國際知名的法國畫家卡米爾．喬瑟夫的創作〈秋天的海潮〉。

奇美新展出的畢卡索盤畫，一組四件，圖案有鳥、小馬、山羊與鬥牛等。館方指出，此系列的線條曼妙，看似簡單，卻能呈現豐富的藝術內涵，接近表現和原始主義的形式，不禁令人聯想到農夫或兒童的素人作風，也反映西班牙的故國傳統，趣味之中，還看得見綿延的鄉愁，寓意深遠。另一件畢卡索的展品則是陶板藝術，名為〈戴花圈的女子頭像〉，也是現場焦點之一。

畢卡索出生於西班牙，是20世紀前半最具影響力的藝術家，在創作的歷程中，經常運用不同的媒材，尋找各種形式的可能性，藉此塑造意象，也反映當代社會。奇美博物館表示，所展出的盤畫、板刻等，屬於畢卡索晚年的「陶瓷器時期」創作，一般較為少見。

米勒名畫展》迎接米勒 超完美準備

【經濟日報╱記者 黃啟菱】

2008.01.27 03:29 am

重量級名畫「拾穗」與「晚禱」，將在5月底來台，法國國寶出借，我方自然要祭出「超完美保全」。史博館表示，本次展覽的安全防護，將是前所未有的高規格，除了為兩幅名畫加設特製的玻璃展櫃，兩幅畫作各投保1億歐元，整檔展覽的保險總額，將超過新台幣百億元，刷新台灣藝文界紀錄。

史博館副館長高玉珍說，這是史博館繼1997年舉辦「黃金印象，奧塞美術館名作特展」後，再度與奧塞美術館合作，光是支付給法方的借展費，就要百萬歐元，總策展經費更是高達新台幣1億元。由於米勒的兩幅名畫已被法國列為「國寶級」畫作，安全規格更甚於11年前來台展出的梵谷、高更等大師作品。

為求分散風險，「雞蛋別放在同一個籃子裡」，奧塞美術館要求，此次展覽的70件作品，要分三梯次搭機來台。另外為避免兩地溫差過大、熱脹冷縮損害畫作，作品抵台落地後，還得先靜置24小時，才能開箱。

高玉珍說，史博館已規劃，為兩件名畫量身打造玻璃展櫃，必要時將安裝防彈玻璃，並限制觀眾入場的流量及觀賞距離，就連觀眾在館內講話，也要跟名畫維持一定距離，避免水氣傷害畫作。

特別的是，奧塞美術館為了確保國寶的安全滴水不漏，還要求加保戰爭險、內亂險、地震險等等，由於台灣找不到保險公司承辦如此多種保險，因此主辦單位費盡千辛萬苦，終於找到法國當地的保險業者承做。

除了自聘的保全人員之外，史博館也向台北市政府中正二分局申請支援，希望能加強警力巡邏，估計至少會增派20位員警、24小時荷槍實彈在史博館周遭巡邏、戒備，向世界展現我方對藝術瑰寶的重視。

米勒名畫展》賞名畫 把握每一分一秒

【經濟日報╱記者 黃啟菱】

2008.01.27 03:29 am

「驚艷米勒，田園之美」大展，將於5月底登場，為迎接世界級名畫，史博館將砸下重金全面改裝一樓展場，展覽期間，還將打破慣例、延長開放時間。民間藝文界人士、國內各重量級收藏家，也已開始動員，準備組團賞畫。

這次的米勒大展，選在史博館一樓登場，史博館表示，屆時史博館一樓的室內空間將會全面改裝，為70幅作品量身打造。目前已請室內設計師著手繪製設計圖稿，將以簡單、大方、動線流暢、不搶畫作風采為設計主軸。除了室內空間改裝之外，史博館還將特製玻璃展櫃，加強控制展場環境，維持恆溫與恆溼。

此外，一般展覽開放時間多為早上10時至下午6時，但為了讓更多台灣民眾欣賞到米勒作品，主辦單位破天荒決定，將開放時間延至晚上9時，甚至不排除開放至半夜，把握住經典名畫在台灣的每一分、每一秒。

迎接米勒大作，不僅史博館全面總動員，民間藝文界人士也已經動了起來。據了解，「藝術導覽名嘴」如資深拍賣官陸潔民、畫廊協會副理事長黃河等人，這幾天都是電話響不停，很多畫迷與收藏家已來電預約，希望能組團賞畫。

米勒名畫展》巴比松七子畫作 一次滿足

【經濟日報╱記者 黃啟菱】

2008.01.27 03:29 am

米勒生於1814年、卒於1875年，是崇尚自然的田園畫家，也是巴比松畫派的代表人物。後世藝評家普遍認為，米勒的創作，畫出了當時法國社會平民百姓最真實的一面，高貴而不朽，也引發普世共鳴。

米勒雖出身富裕的農家，小時候常常下田勞動，因而對土地有特別的感情。他在17歲時創作出「牧羊人在看守他的羊群」畫作，顯露他的繪畫天賦，成年後就前往巴黎學畫。

學成之後，米勒定居於巴黎附近的巴比松，開始以田園風光、庶民百姓為素材作畫。「拾穗」與「晚禱」是米勒最著名的兩幅作品，創作時間很接近，當時米勒共有九個小孩，生活壓力十分沈重，因此能貼切的畫出農夫農婦為生活打拚的神情。

米勒對自己畫作的要求十分嚴格，傳世的作品並不多，約僅80幅，而且多數是小件作品。在奧塞美術館的米勒廳中，收藏有19件，此次將有16件作品來台展出。

資深拍賣官陸潔民表示，在米勒之前，畫家創作多為服務貴族或宗教，很少人關注市井小民的生活；米勒是第一個跳脫出來、以農民生活為創作題材的畫家。

陸潔民說，米勒作品構圖十分嚴謹、色彩協調柔美，而且每張畫都充分表現勞動者的樸拙和真實，帶有濃厚的人道關懷色彩。藝術大師梵谷曾多次表示，米勒是他最崇拜的畫家，也常以米勒畫作為臨摹對象。梵谷甚至曾以米勒的作品「播種者」為創作元素，重新繪製一張「梵谷版」的「播種者」，向大師致意的意味濃厚。

畫廊協會副理事長黃河進一步分析，17世紀歐美主要創作流派為巴洛克藝術，18世紀則進入洛可可時期，這兩大流派，都非常強調華麗、精緻與優雅，裝飾性很強烈。

到了19世紀，由於工業革命與法國大革命，社會制度與生活型態劇烈變遷。黃河說，皇權崩解、沙龍式微，藝術家得以自由創作，不再為貴族服務，米勒、柯洛、胡梭等人，就是最好的例子。而在1841年時，法國第一家畫廊也成立了，藝術自此開始產生市場的概念。

在外在環境的變遷下，19世紀歐美畫壇，產生四大創作流派，其中米勒所屬的巴比松畫派，於19世紀中葉興起，前有新古典主義與浪漫主義，後有印象派，黃河認為，巴比松畫派在美術史上，扮演著承先啟後的重要地位。

巴比松畫派的代表人物，除了米勒之外，還有柯洛、胡梭、賈克、迪亞茲、特華雍與多比尼，後人稱為「巴比松七子」。黃河表示，此次「巴比松七子」畫作全部來台，一個都沒有缺席，非常難得，對藝術有興趣的民眾，可把握機會、親炙大師畫作。

驚艷米勒 展現藝術商機

【經濟日報╱記者 黃啟菱】

2008.01.27 03:29 am

2008夏天，台灣最時尚的休閒，莫過於欣賞藝術大師米勒的名畫真跡。

由聯合報系與國立歷史博物館共同舉辦的「驚艷米勒，田園之美」畫展，將在台北的初夏5月底登場，田園畫家米勒的曠世名作「晚禱」和「拾穗」，將首度在台現身，這兩幅作品被視為法國國寶，從未同時借展海外。

為了迎接這些珍貴畫作來台，史博館將改裝一樓展場、延長開放時間，預料將會吸引60萬人次參觀；聯合報系也與法蘭瓷等業者合作，設計出50款紀念品，從記事本、扇子，到衣服、馬克杯，應有盡有，衍生商機無限。

台灣藝術產業發展成熟，一般民眾的美學素養也都不錯，多數藝術市場人士，均看好台灣市場；但政治因素使然，類似的名家大畫來台展出，並不容易，尤其是台灣與法國並無邦交，卻能成功借展、打敗其他同樣爭取米勒作品展出的國家，究竟如何辦到的，格外受外界關注。

史博館長黃永川表示，一年多前，藝文界人士就聽聞奧塞美術館的米勒廳，將關閉數個月、進行大整修，我方於是透過聯合報系發行人王效蘭，在第一時間與奧塞洽談、爭取米勒畫作來台展出。

但米勒廳將整修的消息，越傳越遠，各界壓力也蜂擁而至，尤其日本人最愛歐美畫作，東京早就多次向奧塞爭取米勒畫作展出，卻遲遲未能成行，其他地區如新加坡、首爾、北京、上海等，也非常積極，而且所擁有的條件都不輸台灣。

黃永川透露，由於王效蘭與法方藝文界人士私交甚篤，一開始就占了優勢；加上史博館與聯合報系過往曾共同舉辦兵馬俑特展，交出單場展覽參觀人次105萬人的成績單、打破世界紀錄，又陸續舉辦過美索不達米亞文物展、法國繪畫三百年展、馬諦斯特展與羅浮宮埃及文物展等大型展覽，辦展能力頗受法方肯定，因此去年秋天，雙方就已大致談妥借展事宜。

去年11月，奧塞美術館派出三位高層主管來台視察，確認史博館的場地情況，以及聯合報系與史博館所累積的辦展實力後，「驚艷米勒，田園之美」一展正式敲定。就在上周，王效蘭專程赴法，與奧塞美術館長勒摩安（Serge Lemoine）簽訂展覽合約。

王效蘭在簽約後表示，「晚禱」和「拾穗」這兩件作品，收錄在國小美術教材中，幾乎每個台灣人都曾看過，可說是感動最多人的畫作。此次奧塞美術館能同時借出展覽，讓她感到受寵若驚，也很期待台灣民眾親身體驗米勒真跡後，能有所收穫。

黃永川說，由於法國將米勒畫作視為國寶，此次展覽，借展費用高達百萬歐元，非常驚人。展出的作品將分三梯次運送來台，主辦單位也已為這批畫作，保了台幣百億元的鉅額保險，其中「拾穗」與「晚禱」兩張畫，就各保了1億歐元。

黃永川表示，此次「驚艷米勒，田園之美」大展，將從5月31日展至9月5日，共展出70件作品，其中米勒的畫作有16幅，另有32件是巴比松畫派成員如胡梭、柯洛、迪亞茲、德崗等人的畫作，還有22件攝影作品，忠實紀錄19世紀的法國社會。

今年夏天，記得來史博館走一趟，為自己的藝術存摺加值。

米勒《拾穗》、《晚禱》真跡來台

中時電子報2008/01/24 04:39 　吳垠慧／台北報導

　　被譽為法國最偉大田園畫家之一的米勒，畢生兩件最經典的作品《拾穗》和《晚禱》
真跡，將於五月底在國立歷史博物館展出。這兩件藝術史上的名作由法國奧塞美術館典
藏，這次來台展出更是是奧塞開館以來，首度同時出借這兩件名畫到國外亮相的首例。

　由於《拾穗》和《晚禱》的重要性，這兩幅畫作的單件作品保險額就達一億歐元的天
價。史博館也嚴陣以待兩幅名作登場，除了加強展場恆溼恆溫控管，更向警方尋求廿四
小時的巡邏協助。

　米勒生於一八一四年法國的農家，童年時與父親一起在田間勞動，讓他日後對農村和
田園生活特別有感情。他年輕時曾在巴黎學習繪畫，因為厭倦都市生活，一八四九年移
居巴比松，開始以農村生活和田園風光作為創作主題。米勒的成就在於，他將專注工作
的下階層勞動身影，表現出莊嚴崇高的意象，讓他在藝術史上佔有一席之地。

　米勒是個嚴謹的藝術家，卅多年的創作生涯裡，只有八十餘件作品傳世。這次來台展
覽的米勒作品共十六件。

　《晚禱》描繪一對在馬鈴薯田工作的夫婦，因遠方傳來晚禱鐘聲，暫停手邊農務站在
曠野中祈禱的肅穆身影。《拾穗》則是描繪秋收季節後，窮人在收割過後的田地中撿拾
剩餘麥穗，以求溫飽，畫中三位農婦沐浴在金黃秋陽下，她們曲背彎腰的拾穗形象，有
種神聖之美。

　「驚艷米勒─田園之美畫展」借展費一百萬歐元，主要以法國十九世紀巴比松畫派成
員的米勒作品為主，另有同時期重要畫家柯洛、胡梭等其他巴比松畫派成員的作品。七
十件展品中包括四十八件油畫，以及廿二件拍攝十九世紀農村生活的原版攝影記錄。

裝置藝術己取代繪畫？

中國時報 2007.12.23　
裝置藝術己取代繪畫？
伍國安

　大約從一九九六年後，台灣近十年來包括美術館、文化中心、公有替代空間所推出
的展覽，不論為國際或是國內的活動，幾乎都是裝置類的作品。繪畫在台灣當代真的式微
了嗎？

　以近年來美術館的立場來做價值判斷，平面繪畫作品在公開展覽形式上，沒辦法做
較多參與機會，所以感覺到處於弱勢狀態；而參與裝置藝術的人也認為未來都是裝置藝術
的世界，並包括比較前衛現代表現主義者所推的觀念藝術、大地藝術、人體藝術、多媒體
藝術、霓虹燈藝術等等，都會有追逐性的展演。

　在台灣的海島環境對新的物象東西追求，都存有一窩蜂心態而在熱門的狀況下，美
術館也附庸風雅，急追國際路線；往往急著辦光鮮有宣傳性、有實務性，能代表台灣走出
國際標題的展覽。且近十年來，公共藝術建築與地方政府接受行政院文建會的獎勵資助經
費，非常多藝術文化活動推展，大致都在裝置概念藝術這個範疇內；如高雄國際貨櫃藝術
、苗栗假面藝術、澎湖國際地景藝術、花蓮國際石雕藝術等等。

　其實，十五世紀文藝復興運動遂興至今，最有保留價值的藝術作品就是平面繪畫。
裝置藝術在全世界畢竟是少數，繪畫至今也不可能式微！繪畫有它的優點只是每個時代的
品味，詮釋不同；但繪畫在人類歷史會永遠存在，我們不必擔心。努力創作繪畫的人都知
道，差不多前面十幾年，都是在鍛鍊自己的功夫，很少可以走入社會層面與同好有對話機
會。

　但藝術家的創作需要很多時間，需要被了解，需要舞台去表現，美術館太重視裝置
藝術策展部分的情形之下，間接阻擋將台灣繪畫文化藝術推向國際交流點。退而現今只有
靠民間社團組織，將台灣繪畫美術推向國際面，做真正培育繪畫藝術創作人才的工作。

　近年來很多就讀藝術及設計類科系的學生，現在幾乎很少從事繪畫創作工作，會畫
圖的也不多，很多創作者還是看生活實際面，有沒有發展的舞台。藝術創作工作朝向「速
食主義」觀；而裝置藝術有它的便利性，可以曇花一現似的作得有模有樣。但是除了石材
、金屬雕塑作品有保留價值外，其餘作品最後也是以所謂「廢棄物」處理。

　另一面，為什麼現在大家都去擠美術館呢？那是因為有利可圖的關係，美術館的作
品收典藏，動輒上百萬元，還有製作作品的補助經費，年輕藝術家現在的市場，不在畫廊
，也不再追求藝術更高的造詣，而是名利都在美術館，這也是我們必須深思的問題。

　期許藝術家們還是得回歸自己理念，太寄望美術館或策辦人都會失望，了無新意「
嘉年華」式的文化藝術，是不可能提昇台灣本土的文化藝術。自己去忠貞的選擇平面繪畫
或裝置藝術形式都很好，但是我認為流行的風潮終究會過去，藝術家最重要的，還是要為
堅持創作中深刻的實際路線而走。繪畫是不可能被任何形式藝術所取代的。

　（作者為中國當代藝術家協會理事兼秘書長）

張曉剛 卡夫卡式的藝術家

来源:人民日報海外版

位於北京城郊的酒廠藝術園，在烈日下燥熱而安靜。下午起來，穿著汗衫大褲衩的張曉剛，應聲出來開門——門外站著六七個人，分屬於日本、法國以及中國本土的3家不同媒體記者，禮貌而固執地要求採訪。

這還不是他的最高紀錄，最多時，他的工作室裡同時接待過5撥記者。這個少年時害羞、沉默、輕度自閉的畫家，現在可以流水作業般，從容應付那些內容相仿的提問。

畫室的四面，豎著他新畫的作品，隨著工作室越來越大，他的畫也越來越大了，整整一面牆的尺寸，畫了5個一字排開的小孩子，他們分別穿著工農商學兵的服飾，滿臉成人般井然、嚴肅的世故表情。

從去年開始，張曉剛的畫在拍賣會上屢創新高，《大家庭》系列中的一幅在蘇富比拍到了78萬美元。很快，他的《天安門》在經過一番激烈競投之後，被一位神秘買家以1800萬港元拍得，而這幅畫從他手中被買走時，價格只不過是1000多美元。他的名字很快飆進了全球當代最著名的畫家之列，並創下了活著的亞洲畫家的拍賣最高紀錄。“我的畫賣100美元的時候，心裡是實實在在的踏實，賣到100萬美元的時候，反而感覺很虛幻。這個市場瘋掉了。”

與名畫家同班

張曉剛4歲開始握畫筆。在機關工作的母親怕孩子們出去野，便教幾兄弟畫畫打發時間，最後只有老三張曉剛堅持下來。“小時候害羞，基本上不怎麼跟人來往，一個人呆在家，看書，畫畫，慢慢變成了一種習慣，一種精神寄託，同時，也是一個出口。通過畫畫，你可以和你創作的人物交流，就不用跟外面的人交流了。”

16歲那年，父親帶他去看望一個畫家。這位啟蒙老師把歐洲的繪畫技法和理念灌輸給了張曉剛。“我完全控制不了自己學畫的欲望，每天都跑到那位畫家家裡學畫畫，進步飛快。父母都認為我瘋掉了。”

在張曉剛的印象裡，從小到大，他幾乎就沒有從父母老師那兒得到過表揚，教畫畫的老師雖然認為他是自己最得意的門生，但也從不說一句讚揚的話。這種藝術上的自卑，在張曉剛考入四川美院以後，被放大到了最大。“別人跟我說我的人事關係被四川拿走時，我說：‘不可能，我這麼差。是不是招生的人弄錯了？’”

張曉剛所在的班級，是當時全國美術界的明星班，何多苓、程叢林、羅中立、高小華等，都是他當時的同班同學。初進校時，跑到同學宿舍一看，他就傻眼了，他們畫得太好了！“比我臨摹的範本都好很多，簡直跟國外的畫冊一樣。像何多苓的畫，我覺得跟謝洛夫沒什麼區別。”

太平間樓上

他們班的同學很快創作了一批傷痕題材的作品：程叢林的《1968年×月×日雪》、高小華的《為什麼》、何多苓的《春風已經蘇醒》、羅中立的《父親》都在全國引起了極大的轟動。傷痕繪畫的風格和語言主要是學習俄羅斯巡迴畫派，這與張曉剛從啟蒙老師那裡學習的歐洲繪畫模式有著很大的不同，也與他的天性相左，他試圖糾正和模仿，但始終覺得彆扭。一年級結束的時候，他寫信給哥哥說：整整一年都沒有進步，我想退學。

大學二年級的時候，學校圖書館買入了一些西方現代藝術的畫冊，當時還看不懂的表現主義和超現實主義把張曉剛弄得很興奮，他發現除了蘇聯式的繪畫語言之外，原來大有另外的道路可走。

臨畢業創作時，他去四川阿壩藏族地區體驗生活，回來後畫了一批藏族題材的創作稿。結果學校認為他的風格太粗野，草稿沒有通過，沒發給他畫布、畫框和顏料。張曉剛最後把畫畫在牛皮紙上，在四川美院成了一個眾所周知的事件。

時任《美術》雜誌編輯的栗憲庭來四川組稿、找新人。開會時，栗憲庭說了句，“除了別人的，張曉剛的這批也不錯。”就因為老栗這句話，學校通過了張曉剛的畢業創作。當期的《美術》發表了羅中立和張曉剛的作品，評價張曉剛有“近乎凡高的情緒”。這在很大程度上鼓舞了他的藝術自信。

畢業回到老家雲南昆明，張曉剛在地方歌舞團做過幾年舞美，“白天看很豔俗的東西，晚上畫一些恐怖的魔鬼”，主張在理性主義之外尋找神秘而原始的生命訴求。後來又轉到四川美院任教，“四川美院盛行的是鄉土藝術，只有我和葉永青兩個人喜歡現代藝術，校領導還勸教師不要跟我們來往。”

有幾年他幾乎是泡在酒桶裡，“每個星期大醉一場，小醉兩場”。喝得胃出血，被送到醫院住了兩個月，他病房的樓下，是太平間。

他要求醫生讓他看看人死的時候是什麼樣子，醫生同意了。這也許是他第一次觸摸到死亡。“生死關頭是一個體驗。當時又年輕，又有幻想，讀的書又比較多，受到的毒害比較深，加上身體不好，想的問題就比較大，比如死亡，比如宗教。”那段時間，他陸續畫了一批陰暗、晦澀的作品：肢解的手，殘缺的軀體，疑似人腦或羊腸的不明物體軟塌塌地堆成一團，而上帝的頭顱漂在水面上……

“出院以後我開始畫一些跟死亡有關的題材，精神上又孤獨又驕傲，覺得自己想要表達的東西和周圍已經有了距離，沒有辦法跟別人溝通。我們那幫人基本上都是過這種分裂的生活。”

血緣牢不可破，家庭不堪一擊

1993年，張曉剛從北京回到昆明老家，他發現了一套家藏的老照片，大時代背景下的小家庭，是不是可以作為一系列以“文革”為背景的創作素材？

那瞬間，他感覺到，“要出東西了”！似乎是某種更為強大的意志抓住他作為一件表達的工具。為了達到想要的效果，他花了兩年時間專門研究技法，把背景降到最低，把色彩降到最低，把一切學院教給他的東西降到最低。按照他的畫法，每一幅畫他都必須畫三到四遍以上，一層幹了，畫另一層。“我是一個追求原作感的畫家，我一定要讓人看了我的原作，覺得看印刷品不過癮。”

張曉剛似乎永遠也畫不出陽光明媚的畫來，他的性格決定了他的藝術作品永遠是陰性和憂鬱的。後來的《血緣大家庭》系列、《同志》以及《記憶與失憶》等系列，那些似乎是斑駁老照片中的人物，擁有被時代整齊劃一了的外型、衣著和表情，單眼皮的眼睛，眼仁微微凸起，冷漠而警覺，神態遊移。

“我就像家裡一個多餘的人，他們根本不需要我。下鄉時，臨走前我爸給我哥10元，只給我5元，哥哥分一些錢給我，我爸還跟他說：‘別給他，他又會亂花。’我每次從鄉下回家，一定要背一袋米回來，快吃完的時候，我爸就會跟我說：‘米吃完了，你該走了。’如果我不帶口糧回去，他會說：‘我們怎麼養得起你？’所以，我從小就沒有家的感覺，下鄉讓我精神愉快，我覺得我自由了，能夠靠勞動掙錢養活自己，離家越遠越好。”

曾經有一個法國人對張曉剛說，感覺他是一個“卡夫卡式的藝術家”——比較關注私密性；內向，相對地封閉自己；關注的都是個人的感覺，而且是不太正常的感覺；都有幻想的成分；都是日記式的表述方式，寫什麼都是我我我，而不是他他他。“我覺得他說得很有道理，而且我也很喜歡卡夫卡。”

1999年與唐蕾離婚後，他拎了個包從成都來到北京，41歲換個城市重新租房過單身漢的生活。上午睡覺，下午畫畫，晚上跟朋友們碰面、喝酒。之後的8年裡，他搬了好幾次家，還是沒找到紮根北京的感覺，他說：我是一條野狗。

一次在重慶，他跟方力均、王廣義一起辦講座，學生問他，對血緣和家庭怎麼看，他脫口而出：血緣牢不可破，家庭不堪一擊。

是的，掌握了血緣與家庭，就掌握了張曉剛的主線。他的畫裡永遠都是父母隱約浮現的面孔，他的工作室裡貼著女兒歡歡從小到大的照片。女兒13歲出畫冊《家有小狗》，他歡喜地為她寫序言，並暗自得意孩子繼承了他的稟賦。他辦公桌上的煙缸，是一隻張開的大手，每個手指頭上都刻著不同表情的人臉。女兒小的時候，他常把自己的手指頭畫上哭笑各異的人臉，他的大手就成了女兒的玩具。女兒大了，看見這樣的煙缸，憶起兒時的遊戲，就買下來，送給他。

Sold for £18.5m, a Raphael portrait that once cost $325

By Emily Dugan
Friday, 6 July 2007

A rare portrait by Raphael that had not been seen by the public for more than 40 years sold for £18.5m at Christie's last night. It was the largest sum ever paid at auction for a work by the Renaissance painter.

The work, an oil portrait of the Florentine ruler Lorenzo de' Medici which has been described as "the most important Renaissance portrait to be offered at auction for a generation", had been predicted to fetch between £10m and £15m.

But its recent history has been far from illustrious. Sold to the American collector Ira Spanierman for just $325 in 1968, the painting ­ then in poor condition ­ was regarded with scepticism by many, who doubted that it was the work of the Italian master.

Three years later, art historians confirmed that the work was indeed by Raffaello Sanzio, popularly known as Raphael, leaving Mr Spanierman sitting on a potential gold mine.

According to Christie's, the largest sum fetched for a Raphael at auction prior to this sale was a drawing sold in 1996, which went for £5.3m. This lower figure is in part due to the fact that it is so rare for his oil paintings, which are significantly more valuable than sketches, to be auctioned.

Private sales are more common for Raphael's works, and in 2004 the National Gallery paid £22m to stop his Madonna of the Pinks leaving the UK. The portrait sold yesterday, to a private collector, shows a sumptuously dressed Medici, draped in a shawl of gold and red with a delicately painted fur collar, standing against a rich green background.

The detail in the depiction of his robes is typical of the Italian master, who began his career in provincial church decoration, and came to be known as the "Prince of Painters".

The painting, which has been on display at Christie's in London since 30 June, is also politically important. It was commissioned by Medici's uncle, Pope Leo X, just before the duke got married to a wife he had never seen. The miniature portrait of his future wife that can be seen clutched in the sitter's hand gave the duke his first sneak preview of his betrothed. The pope was involved in the commission as he had personally arranged his nephew's marriage to Madeleine de la Tour D'Auvergne, a cousin of the king of France.

Lorenzo de' Medici, who was the Duke of Urbino and the ruler of Florence between 1513 and 1519, was the Charles Saatchi of the Renaissance. As one of the most influential art collectors of the time, he and his family commissioned a score of artists that reads like a Who's Who of artistic Florence. The masters patronised by the Florentine family included Botticelli, Leonardo da Vinci, Donatello and Fillippo Lippi.

Richard Knight, the international director of Christie's old master department, said he was delighted the "remarkable" painting had finally come to auction. "The importance of the artist and the sitter, together with the provenance and the historical context behind this painting's creation, make it one of the most significant old master pictures to be offered at auction for a generation," he said.

Other masterpieces under the hammer at Christie's yesterday were a Pieta by the 17th-century Venetian artist Domenico Zampieri, and a portrait by the British Restoration painter and official artist to Charles II, Sir Peter Lely.

A Powerful Collector Changes Course

Saatchi Gallery A work by Peter Doig from "The Triumph of Painting."

By ALAN RIDING

Published: January 29, 2005

LONDON, Jan. 25 - If collecting is itself an art, Charles Saatchi remains Britain's most talked-about contemporary artist. A wealthy adman turned art lover, he spawned the 1990's fad for irreverent young British artists and brought contemporary art into the mainstream here. As a reluctant celebrity and unabashed power broker, he has also long been the target of speculation - and grumbling - about his taste and motivation.

Little wonder, then, that when the Saatchi Gallery opened the first installment of a three-part yearlong show called "The Triumph of Painting" here this week, interest in the London art world centered less on the handful of painters initially featured than on a question: Why has Mr. Saatchi turned his back on the conceptual art of his long-cosseted Y.B.A.'s, as young British artists are known here?

Not only has he cleared their works from his labyrinthine Thames-side gallery in the old Greater London Council building, but this month he also sold the most emblematic work of the Y.B.A. movement - Damien Hirst's "Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living," better known as the pickled shark - to an American buyer for what press accounts said was $13 million. (He paid $93,000 for it in 1992.)

Now, showing off his latest purchases, Mr. Saatchi has proclaimed the rebirth of painting by presenting the first of an eventual 56 artists working in canvas and oil, among them the German cult figure Martin Kippenberger, who died in 1997; the leading Belgian minimalist Luc Tuymans; and the South African-born Dutch painter Marlene Dumas.

That painting is alive and well today may not be news in, say, New York or Berlin, but in British contemporary art circles it is a view that borders on the subversive. Over the last 10 years, only 5 of 40 nominees for the headline-grabbing annual Turner Prize have been painters. And for even longer, conceptual and video artists have reigned largely unchallenged here.

As it happens, Mr. Saatchi has changed directions before. In the 1980's he built up a major collection of postwar American and European art. He then sold it at great profit and channeled his resources into a new generation of British artists like Mr. Hirst, Rachel Whiteread, Tracey Emin, the Chapman brothers, Sarah Lucas and Marc Quinn.

So now he has come back to painting.

But why? Some art critics have long accused Mr. Saatchi of being more dealer than collector, less art lover than marketing genius who exhibits his collection to increase its value. This was certainly charged in 1997 when London's Royal Academy of Arts put on "Sensation," a show of Y.B.A. works owned by Mr. Saatchi, which also traveled to the Brooklyn Museum. And almost inevitably, similar suspicions are again being aired.

In an article last weekend in The Sunday Telegraph of London, Andrew Graham-Dixon conceded that Mr. Saatchi could genuinely believe painting is now central to contemporary art. "It is also possible that, like a cannily contrarian fund-manager working in the equities market, he has simply decided that painting is currently an undervalued sector - and he has bet his portfolio on the proposition that it has a big recovery upside," Mr. Graham-Dixon wrote.

Mr. Saatchi, 61, who is married to the cooking celebrity Nigella Lawson, is as famous for avoiding the press as he is skilled at promoting his shows. But in a rare interview with The Art Newspaper last month, presumably timed to draw attention to "The Triumph of Painting," he explained his approach to collecting as well as his interest in painting.

"I buy art that I like," he was quoted as saying. "I buy it to show it off in exhibitions. Then, if I feel like it, I sell it and buy more art. As I have been doing this for 30 years, I think most people in the art world get the idea by now. It doesn't mean I've changed my mind about the art that I end up selling. It just means that I don't want to hoard everything forever."

Saatchi Gallery A work by Marlene Dumas from "The Triumph of Painting."

As for his new exhibition, Mr. Saatchi insisted that he had no "lofty" agenda. "People need to see some of the remarkable painting, produced and overlooked, in an age dominated by the attention given to video, installation and photographic art," he said. He added, "For me, and for people with good eyes who actually enjoy looking at art, nothing is as uplifting as standing before a great painting whether it was painted in 1505 or last Tuesday."

For "The Triumph of Painting," he has cast a wide net, with 6 painters in the first display, on view through June 5; 13 in the second, running through September; and 37 in the final installment, through December. All 350 or so paintings scheduled to be presented belong to Mr. Saatchi, who also directed the hanging of the first part of the exhibition.

Announcing that "we are in fact witnessing the vigorous reassertion of painting," a weighty catalog explains that the first group of painters was chosen as the most influential of their generation. Of these, only one, Peter Doig, is a Briton, although he now lives in Trinidad. The others are Europeans, with only Mr. Tuymans, who had a major show at the Tate Modern last year, already well known in Britain.

Yet the most striking difference between these artists and the Y.B.A.'s is not the medium in which they work. It is that, while the Y.B.A.'s liked to shock British tabloids with their sexual and existentialist installations, the European painters on show here are primarily engaged in social and political commentary. And in Britain, ideological art is still very much a novelty.

In the first group, Mr. Doig, 45, is the exception. His large, colorful landscapes inspired by photography are displayed first. But then the show darkens.

The painter chosen to introduce this mood is Mr. Kippenberger, a rebellious and often outrageous German artist who explored every art form, including music and writing, and whose following has grown since his death at 43 eight years ago.

In painting, as in everything he did, Mr. Kippenberger was stylistically eclectic. And Mr. Saatchi's paintings demonstrate this. They include one of the artist's many self-portraits, in this case showing him stripped to his underwear, his body fat and bloated and a balloon over his face. No less melancholic is "I Am Too Political," a painting of a hugely fat woman lying across six canvases. In other oils, his fascination with the degenerate is more disguised.

Jörg Immendorff, 59, the other German in the show, is more directly political, frequently echoing his generation's struggle with Germany's postwar legacy, with both Hitler and the swastika occasionally appearing in his crowded cartoonlike oils. Several of the paintings come from his "Café Deutschland" series. "All's Well That Ends Well," crowded with panic-stricken eagles, is described as an allegory of a divided Germany.

Mr. Tuymans, 46, whose work often addresses the Holocaust, has a painting here, "Maypole," that somehow suggests a Hitler Youth festival. "Within," with the bars of a cage cutting across a cloudy landscape, is less explicit.

By contrast, Ms. Dumas, 51, seeks out taboo subjects: "Young Boys" shows naked boys as if they are awaiting inspection; "Die Baba" depicts a sickly-looking baby with bruised lips and nose; "The Cover-Up" has a young girl lifting her dress over her head.

The oldest painter in the show is Hermann Nitsch, 66, an Austrian artist who gained fame in the 1960's through what he called "actions," in which animals were slaughtered and their blood used ritualistically to stage outdoor crucifixions. These performances provoked scandal and earned him three prison terms in Austria for blasphemy. All but one of his works shown here mirror his obsession with blood, among them several so-called splatter paintings.

How the public will respond to "The Triumph of Painting" has yet to be seen, although the critical response has been muted. Jackie Wullschlager wrote in The Financial Times that "not one picture here takes possession of you." Still, while Mr. Saatchi's pitch can be fairly judged only after all 56 listed artists have been seen, he already has reason to feel satisfied: for the first time in 20 years, contemporary painting is back on London's art agenda.

Sensation! It's paint on canvas

From The Times

January 26, 2005

THE TRIUMPH OF PAINTING
Saatchi Gallery, SE1

The new Saatchi Gallery exhibition shows that reports of the death of painting were greatly exaggerated

Rachel Campbell-Johnson

The scorched-earth progress of conceptualism, supposedly, left the canvas a wasteland. Painting was declared dead. After all, what more could it contribute? We had seen Ad Reinhardt’s all-black works — “just the last paintings anyone could make”, he had called them. We had looked into Robert Ryman’s uninflected white squares. Surely there was nowhere to go after that.

Or was there? Nothing is ever black and white — and not least art history. The death of painting has been proclaimed repeatedly — with the advent of photography, for instance, or the rise of Duchamp — but rumours of its demise always proved premature. A miraculous resurrection was inevitably announced later.

Painting was not dead; it was just up against the wall and being shot at — and often by its own practitioners, who wanted to clear the ground so that they could reclaim it. Reinhardt might have seemed to be forecasting the end of an art form in the 1960s, but what he was actually doing was challenging it to break free from a prison of period rhetoric and find new possibilities. He was provoking the painter to change the rules of his game.

So, when painting was said to be dead in the 1980s, it was only one particular view of the medium that was passing. It was only the end of one game and the start of another. And this is the start that the latest Saatchi Gallery show now looks back to as it opens the first of a series of three shows — The Triumph of Painting — that will run over the year.

Part one, which opens today, represents the work of six painters who, while Damien Hirst was out shark fishing and Tracey Emin was lounging in bed, kept on working in a traditional medium — or at least, as in the case of the irrepressibly subversive (but prematurely deceased) Martin Kippenberger, looked for ways in which painting could still be relevant amid an oeuvre that included anything from the invention of a non-existent global subway system for which he installed fake entrances in cities the world over to the buying of a run-down petrol station in Brazil which he named after a Nazi war criminal.

But don’t expect dramatic new discoveries from this opening section of the show. Saatchi is not setting trends; he is catching up with them. These are artists who have been in the picture for at least 20 years. Their visions may have been forged in the fires of unfashionability, but now they are famous — or infamous in some cases. Their work sells for hundreds of thousands. It has been shown in major gallery spaces. Only last year Luc Tuymans was the subject of a major Tate Modern exhibition.

And don’t expect any coherent aesthetic — not even, necessarily, within the work of one artist. Kippenberger smashed the sacrosanct notion of the trademark style. He signs anything from a billboard poster that derides the enticements of advertising to a rubber-latex-skinned canvas that mocks sexual taboo. This is not a show that attempts to define a movement or shared aim. The artists come from anywhere. Marlene Dumas is South African-born and Amsterdam-based. Peter Doig was brought up in Canada but now lives in Trinidad. And their work goes everywhere. There are landscapes and figure paintings, still lifes and abstracts. There is anger and humour and politics and porn, satire and nostalgia, loveliness and ungainliness, reticence and overkill.

But what, broadly speaking, they share is the attempt to return to a traditional form (often after exploring other media) and reclaim it for a postmodern world in which fixed meanings and functions have been lost amid a swarm of competing references, implications and truths. Art-historical markers — allusions to anyone from Edouard Manet to Joseph Beuys — stick up like tide measures amid the swirling flood. They are swept away into surfaces in which reality can be based on the falsity of the photograph, in which authenticity has dissolved along with any romantic notions of artistic genius. These are savaged in paintings that are wilfully bad. Peter Doig’s lambent meditations on landscape may ease the spectator into this show, but after that prepare for the belligerently clumsy or the brutally tawdry, the brazen or the deliberately shabby.

If you hoped that the triumph of painting meant that old-fashioned craftsmanship was about to overtake new-fangled conceptualism, then think again. These painters are not backtracking on Post-Modernism’s progress. If anything they are pushing it further, testing ways in which painting can become relevant in its context. Their works should be approached in the same way as conceptual pieces. “A good artist has less time than ideas,” Kippenberger said.

Painting is dead! Long live the spectator! A critical faculty is as much a part of these works as their painterly surface. The visitor is entangled in the densely problematic vision of artists such as Dumas, whose declared aim is “to reveal not display”.

He soon finds himself tripping over his own thoughts as he struggles to make sense of meanings that are embedded as much in the medium as in his own mind.

The mistake of this show is the inclusion of works by the “Pope of Viennese Aktionism”, Hermann Nitsch, whose splatterfest abstracts are the spin-off of ludicrous performances involving buckets of blood and lashings of gore. His belief that art should break out from the canvas and incorporate the reality of visceral emotion and raw corporeal experience goes little further than Grand Guignol. And the catalogue (which includes all the images from future shows in this series) seems to presage the sort of splashy Expressionism that might make you start wishing that painting would indeed undergo a dramatic decline.

Saatchi clearly hasn’t completely abandoned his taste for publicity-hungry sensationalism. He also includes several works by the German Jörg Immendorf, whom he has been collecting for years. In these political rants, the polemics take precedence over the painting. The images tell, not show.

Perhaps this show relies too heavily on what was lying around in the stockroom — padded, to judge by a slant towards later works, by more recent purchases. There are several painters who could (and perhaps should) have been represented but aren’t. The visual puzzles of the freewheeling iconoclast Sigmar Polke, for one, would have made an informative addition. And for all the rebellious energy, the cultish flamboyance, the belligerent provocation of Kippenberger, for all his importance as the poster boy of Post-Modernism, a show of this sort should perhaps have left him out. Put into what is starting to seem like an art-historical box, his complex and prolific vision feels cramped.

But where Saatchi succeeds is in offering viewers the chance to recap or catch up with the careers of artists as pioneering as Dumas and Tuymans. These are artists whose works are as visually compelling as they are intellectually complex, who even as they discomfit also fascinate. They lure the spectator into a sort of symbiotic alliance with their work.

They do not, of course, prove that painting has definitively triumphed over other media. A good painter is as rare as a good artist of any sort. Nor does their painting spell a radical change in aesthetic outlook. They are still conceptual. But what they do show is that painting has continuing possibilities, that it can still effect that magical alchemy that has been practised since our prehistoric ancestors first turned muddy ochres into magical beasts.

They prove that painting is not dead. And it helped that some workmen were thumping away in the far-off bowels of the building. Their banging was like the pulse of some waking leviathan’s heartbeat.

BRITS AND PIECES...

1985 Charles Saatchi launches his gallery with heavyweight modern masters including Donald Judd and Andy Warhol.

1992 First of his Young British Artists shows. Perhaps the adman’s most successful brand label.

1994 Young British Artists III: “Our most voracious contemporary collector confounds all expectations . . . the hallowed business of mark-making on canvas is once again a focus for debate.” — Richard Cork in The Times.

1997 Saatchi’s masterstroke, Sensation at the Royal Academy in 1997. Paint and eggs are thrown, critics’ responses are mixed but the show boosts YBA market value and the ailing RA, with over 2,800 visitors daily.

1999 New Neurotic Realism, an attempt to move away from Brit Art, ends in critical disaster. In 2003, Saatchi moves his Brit Art greatest hits collection to County Hall.

2004 The fire at Momart storage hits the media mogul hardest. Tabloids cry divine justice, critics rally around the loss of the art, despairing at public philistinism.

Also 2004. . . Saatchi’s contentious status as art patron is highlighted when he claimed that Nicholas Serota had refused to accept his collection for the Tate. Serota said that Saatchi never made an offer, countering that for years Saatchi had refused to aid the Tate with purchasing key British artworks.