zspace

主題：陳幸婉的水墨藝術 On Chen Hsin-wan’s Ink Works.

主講：尚諾‧許華茲 Jeannot Schwartz 

時間：2011.3.25（五）19:00~21:00

地點：Zspace四樓

從1989到1990年間，瑞士藝術家 Jeannot Schwartz 有六個月的時間待在台灣藝術家陳幸婉的工作室。直到2004年陳幸婉過世，這兩位藝術家有幸在台灣、巴黎、以及奧地利提洛山區等地相會。

在繪畫上，他們共同的興趣之一是：在宣紙上使用毛筆和水墨。協同另一位藝術家陳伯良，三人一起交換這方面的觀念，並互相鼓勵嘗試進一步的實驗。後來陳幸婉才出乎大家的意料，由巨幅的多媒材拼貼轉向使用畫筆的水墨作品，並將熱情浸淫其中。

為了這次的藝術講談，Jeannot Schwartz 挑選了一些陳幸婉的水墨作品，以鏡頭捕捉它們，以影像呈現其結果。此次的放映將提供我們深入自身感知的機會，藉著最少的介入，Jeannot Schwartz邀請我們，透過影像追溯陳幸婉的筆墨作品同時，去測試我們自己身體的姿態，由而以新的眼光觀看她的作品。

講者簡介

Jeannot Schwartz，1956年出生於瑞士，現居奧地利Innsbruck。與台灣素有淵源的他，1989年曾透過瑞士巴塞爾的克里斯多夫‧瑪里安基金會策劃的工作室交換計畫，與台灣藝術家陳幸婉互相交流；1990年與藝術家陳建北於伊通公園（IT PARK）舉行聯展、台中當代畫廊舉辦個展；2001、2003年應邀參與高雄國際貨櫃藝術節。

其作品從繪畫衍申至雕塑、錄像、行為等多樣形態，深受哲學家Emmanuel Levinas著作啟發，除了探討「自我」（selfness）、「他者」（otherness）、「面容」（countenance）之間的關係，Jeannot Schwartz的作品尤其強調「位置」和「身體接觸」等語言難以涉入的感知地帶。透過他的抓握雕塑（grasp sculpture）和互動裝置，觀者往往能對日常情境產生新的感知體驗與反省。（Jeannot Schwartz個人網頁http://jeannot.at/index.php）

Zspace地址：忠信市場，台中市五權西路一段

（國美館正對面，綠園道左側，長青登山協會旁之入口） 

http://zspace.pixnet.net/blog ； 0952-585-162

Jeannot Schwartz台灣之行其他講座行程 

3月18日晚7：30 / 台北伊通公園畫廊 

錄影放映：「掌中鏡頭下的『伊通公園』」
主講： Jeannot Schwartz

1989年，瑞士藝術家 Jeannot Schwartz透過巴塞爾的克里斯多夫‧瑪里安基金會策劃的工作室交換計畫，而與台灣藝術家陳幸婉互相交流，得以來到台灣。

由於莊普的發想，遂在1990年與陳建北在伊通公園畫廊舉行聯展。此後，尚諾‧許華茲數度返台，其中在2001和2003年，參加了高雄貨櫃藝術節。

許華茲將談及掌中鏡頭，這種裝置配合視覺和方便操控的功能，經由敏感的手指尖，可以調塑光影成為立體律動的影像。經由這樣的鏡頭，透過網路，他製作了伊通公園畫廊的藝術家群像。在放映時，我們可以由掌中鏡頭測知掌握時的動作姿態。

 

3月27日，下午2：00 / 台灣藝術大學，譚力新教授邀請
主講：Jeannot Schwartz
為期一年的時間，Jeannot Schwartz 在因斯布魯克的廣告設計學院主持一個創作實驗室。這實驗室的裝置很少。為了把這困境轉為正面的利用，所有嘗試的實驗包含了大比例的人為演練。往往包括以玩具般的物品改善平衡(特技者一般)的技術，或同時以雙重性動搖單一性觀念。

這場演講包含錄影放映和協同的運動。參與者是積極的融入，這融入的過程將提供參與者隨後討論的論點。

延伸閱讀

Thought movements

Tangible traces of an imagined motion

In touching someone we are also touched ourselves, allow ourselves to be touched. A handshake, the moment in which gazes meet, in which a gesture becomes physically manifest and palpable as contact, are central elements in the artistic thinking and working of Jeannot Schwartz. For many years, the painter and performance artist has dealt with the “place of touch” and the traces left behind by physical contact.

        This preoccupation is based on a complex structure of ideas, that in the case of Jeannot Schwartz’s work is inspired above all by the writings of Emmanuel Levinas, in which he found a theoretical foundation and a constant point of reference. Terms such as “self” and “the other” are not just relevant for Levinas’ own socio-ontological and anthropological reflections, they also play a major part in a discourse that has involved and still involves numerous 20th century theoreticians, and which also revolves around the topics of identity and otherness as well as tertiality, i.e. the position of a third person in this constellation.

        In his habilitation thesis titled “Der Andere: Studien zur Sozialontologie der Gegenwart” (lit. The other: studies on the social ontology of the present)[1], the German philosopher Michael Theunissen, starting out from certain precepts of inter-subjectivity and the philosophy of dialogue, investigated the interdependency of the terms “Selbigkeit” (selfness) and “Andersheit” (otherness). In what way is the self or the other constituted? Linking and separating the terms, as well as their preconditions, he puts up for discussion, among other things, their “consequences for human self-perception, our relationship to the world and complex forms of sociality.”[2] Central concepts such as the relationship between me and you, or also encounter, dialogue, communication and interaction[3] have become constants in the discussion of inter-subjectivity and sociality. The “other” has had a fixed place in the theory ever since and has also been taken up in numerous philosophical dissertations, e.g. in Bernhard Waldenfels’ Der Stachel des Fremden (lit. The sting of the other)[4] or his studies on phenomenology entitled Topographie des Fremden (lit. Topography of the other)[5] and Grenzen der Normalisierung (lit. Borders of normalisation)[6] which clearly formulate the political and social aspects of this discourse.

        In Jeannot Schwartz’s oeuvre these positions are subjected to a dialectic act of mediation. In a continuous process, identity and otherness, the self and the other are brought together or else analytically separated in the course of reflection, in order finally to be brought in relation to each other once more in actual artistic activity, which in the case of the performances also is social activity.

        Apart from the terms “the self”, “the other” or “countenance” it is above all the place and the physical contact itself that the works of Jeannot Schwartz place a special emphasis on. What they deal with is the perception of, and the reflection on, situations and everyday experiences, leaving behind both physical and mental traces.

Aesthetic practice and political action

Jeannot Schwartz’s painting as well as his grasp sculptures mark just such places of physical contact. For many years, the artist has been experimenting with the grasping action of the hand. His hollow grasping forms, also put to the test in performances, which he likes to subject to a re-enactment process in collective test set-ups, are quite without comparison in the contemporary art scene. Like few artists, Jeannot Schwartz is able to directly translate theoretical reflections into basic experiences. The presentation of these objects in the course of the performances is unobtrusive and conceptually straightforward. Also, they do not take centre stage, but are merely vehicles for a form of self-awareness, for in contrast to the touching of an object as we do in everyday life, the objects of Jeannot Schwartz are reflected forms to begin with, which themselves frequently deal with the movement of grasping, the grasping impulse, and with the hand itself. The grasping hand, in other words, is in itself the object of reflection here, in such a way as the hollow space of the hand is imagined, and the place of physical contact addressed as well as the mimesis of grasping, and of the hand. The hollow space of the hand, le creux de la main, is not just the designation of a space addressing an absence, but also the potential of grasping as such.

        One such test set-up was developed by Jeannot Schwartz in 2007 for Kunst im Gang at the Theological Faculty of the University of Innsbruck. The installation “anliegende Horizonte” (lit. adjoining horizons) consisted of a handrail installed in a corridor, inviting visitors to walk along and grasp along, as it were. What is remarkable is that participants, apart from their personal experience, also embarked on a parallel reflection triggered by short presentations, read out while walking and grasping, that confronted each person’s own experience with the experience of an opposite, of another person. The articulation of the individual experience in the situation of a performance also is an important aspect in the project entitled “ORT DER BEHAUPTUNG” (lit. Place of assertion, kooio forum für kunst und kommunikation, Innsbruck, 2010). In this instance, the metaphorical term “Behauptung” for one thing referred to the “Haupt” (German for “head”), for the idea was to carry objects on the head, on the other hand the project also aimed for “Behauptung” (meaning “assertion” in this context), for the objects, by being placed on the head, eluded the respective person’s own gaze and observation. In 2000, Jeannot Schwartz, with his “Türschnallen” (lit. door handles), an installation at the Institute of Art History at the University of Innsbruck, which found their place as actual door handles on the office doors of staff, set in motion a lasting reflection on a person’s acts of grasping. In 2005, the collective aspect of the grasping experiments also found verbal expression in “Erprobungen im Kollektiv” (lit. Tested by the collective) at the Kunstpavillon in Innsbruck, an event in which both the work “Structures of an action with both hands”[7] and “Greifen für Index und Daumen beider Hände” (lit. Grasping for index finger and thumb of both hands), a performance that Schwartz rehearsed together with the staff of an Innsbruck cardboard manufacturer in 2004[8], were taken up once more.

        A crucial aspect, when attempting to understand Jeannot Schwartz’s works, is the artist’s approach to aesthetic experience. This experience is closely linked to the experience of processuality. Schwartz’s artistic practice aims at moments of reflection, which only through personal experience and concrete action acquire a basis for something we would like to term “movement of thought.” Accordingly, concrete action takes on a central role in his work as an artist. “Thinking is action. In this context we also have to deal with the question of signs/structures as action,” Jeannot Schwartz says. The gesture as action and the image as a metaphor for visibility are two categories that may be read as acts of mediation between aesthetic practice and political action.

Living in situations

Jeannot Schwartz’s performative works could be described as enactments of situations. The “situation” also has a place in the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas, who in fact described his own phenomenological approach as an enactment of a concrete situation.[9] The human existence is intrinsically linked to the experiencing of situations. We cannot evade them, we are always “in situation,” as it were. This inescapability was pointed out by Levinas in his early work De l’évasion (Engl. On Escape)[10]. Just as we have no way of escaping our existence, we will not be able to escape the situativity of this existence. Even if the experiencing of these situations may be an individual matter, there are no separate, mutually independent situations. Situativity essentially takes place through communication with our surroundings, through the experiencing of our own being in context. All of which already hints at a connection with the “other.” To recognize the other in his/her situatedness means to perceive his/her “visage,” to regard him/her as a person within a situational fabric. Linked to the thinking of the situation, therefore, is also the thinking of relations. Relationships pervade our lives. And just as the situation they are characterized by relationality, by the way in which we relate to each other. This positioning for its part refers to our corporeality. The relationship to the other and the experience of our own corporeality once more is a situation in itself, even though it may be fleeting and therefore can never be a real situatedness.

        If Jeannot Schwartz’s experimental compositions here are described as movements of thought, then this happens while bearing in mind this basic situational constant and the relations arising from it. Situativity means the mediation between outside and inside, between our inner perception and that which we perceive of the world outside. This perception in the case of Schwartz’s art is reflected as an aesthetic process, which he situates between gesture and image, between acting and seeing, between activity and passivity.

        In her book Ästhetik des Performativen (Engl. The Transformative Power of Performance)[11], Erika Fischer-Lichte describes, among other things, how performance artists, over recent decades, have been dealing with questions of materiality and symbolism, and in a short episode depicts a phenomenon that also applies to the works of Jeannot Schwartz. “Once perceived in their materiality, these isolated emergent phenomena trigger a wealth of associations, ideas, thoughts, memories, and emotions in the perceiving subjects, enabling them to make connections to various other phenomena. They are evidently perceived as signifiers which refer to diverse ideas and contexts and can be related to a range of signifieds. The isolated materiality of the various elements thus effects an immense pluralization of potential meaning.”[12] In this context the author also writes about the meaning and legibility of gestures and in particular about the self-referentiality of gestures. “The gesture therefore means exactly what it performs.”[13] The basic idea is the separation of the gesture from its symbolic content and thus the perception of the gesture as movement and as that which actually emerges, as phenomenal being. This differentiation allows for a fundamentally different aesthetic experience.

Exploring the self and the other

In Jeannot Schwartz’s performative experiments with the grasping motion the audience itself becomes active, insofar as each participant has to find strategies for accomplishing a task, which is usually based on the re-enactment of a certain gesture. This task usually consists of short instructions, or in the case of the door handles of repeating a perfectly everyday action using a grasping impulse as a starting point.

        A central element here is autopoiesis, which Erika Fischer-Lichte describes as a feedback loop, functioning as a “self-organizing system which must permanently integrate newly emerging, unplanned, and unpredictable elements.”[14] Autopoiesis is closely connected to the perception of the persons involved, whereby both the audience as a group and the individuals as well as the performance artist come to experience themselves as subject and active agent. This transformation of the audience into acting individuals, which consequently is of vital importance to the unfolding of the performance, has been a basic constant of performance art since the nineteen-sixties and also finds a correspondence in contemporary theatre. “The artists exposed themselves and others to an uncontrollable situation created by them (…).”[15] Now, there naturally are the most various approaches, and the strategies in performance art, especially a performance art that takes as a starting point the perception of the social and political body, are extremely varied. Still, there is one important correspondence to the works of Jeannot Schwartz that can be deduced from his conceptual approach, namely reduction. With his grasping experiments, Schwartz has found something like an artistic counterpart, applied to a very small, but highly significant segment, to the method derived from phenomenology and from Edmund Husserl of eidetic reduction, which in its clarity is very convincing.

Memory and sensibility

Jeannot Schwartz’s paintings, his grasping sculptures, and his performance set-ups, besides the elements described, also revolve around the concept of the trace. Traces are left not just by his own gestural and haptic involvement with the material in the process of forming, but also by the mediation of these forms in the re-enactment through collective or individual actions. The grasping action of the hand, the leaving behind of imprints, as well as the touching through the hand, are key elements of Schwartz’s artistic method of describing the world and to facilitate and reflect on aesthetic experience, that also at all times is political experience. The metaphorical and vernacular approach to the term of grasping in itself points to the most important associations: the grasping of something, the touching of something as an aggressive or appropriating act, or seizing something in the sense of acceptance and exploration. Emmanual Levinas wrote about the grasping of the hand: “The hand comprehends the thing not because it touches it on all sides at the same time (it does not touch it throughout), but because it is no longer a sense-organ, pure enjoyment, pure sensibility, but is mastery, domination, disposition – which do not belong to the order of sensibility.”[16]

Negation and concretion

The hand as an instrument of touch is only one of the aspects here, for Jeannot Schwartz in his prehensile investigations goes far beyond the feeling or the forming of an object. The hollow space of grasping, the room in between, but also the touch of the hands and ultimately the reflection on the place of touch make his works grow beyond the act of touching into processes, in the course of which, by re-enacting and re-sensing, movements of thought are triggered.

        On the occasion of an artist talk, entitled “Experimente am Nullpunkt der Malerei” (lit. Experiments at the zero point of painting), at the Kunstverein Freiburg in 1999, Schwartz put it like this: “The contact surfaces of the door handles are formed over the grasping hand. They are objects grasped by the hand which invite the hand to grasp itself. A situation which, through the lack of a separating element – the door leaf is absent –, can unexpectedly result in a face to face confrontation.” The face is the central concept in the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas, who in his writings laid particular emphasis on the relationship of the self to the other. The zero point of painting here consists of it being an act of translation and of leaving the picture plane in order to facilitate individual experience. That his approach, nonetheless, has a lot to do with painting is shown by Schwartz’s acute awareness of the gestural aspect in his paintings, in which the picture space plays as much of a role as the acting within this space does. Gestural and visual aspects correspond in an artistic work process that combines aesthetic experience with political reflection.                                             

Verena Konrad                   

[1]     Michael Theunissen, Der Andere: Studien zur Sozialontologie der Gegenwart, Berlin/New York ²1977 (first published by de Gruyter in 1965)

[2]     Transl. from Joachim Fischer, “Der Dritte. Zur Anthropologie der Intersubjektivität,” in: wir/ihr/sie. Identität und Alterität in Theorie und Methode, ed. W. Eßbach, Würzburg 2000, p. 103

[3]     Cf. ibid.

[4]     Bernhard Waldenfels, Der Stachel des Fremden, Frankfurt am Main 1990

[5]     Bernhard Waldenfels, Topographie des Fremden. Studien zur Phänomenologie 1, Frankfurt am Main 1997

[6]     Bernhard Waldenfels, Grenzen der Normalisierung. Studien zur Phänomenologie 2, Frankfurt am Main 1998

[7]     This work was created as a contribution to the 2^nd International Container Art Festival in Kaohsiung/Taiwan in 2003 and there was put to the test by twenty students of Kaohsiung Normal University.

[8]     The project formed part of the company portrait “Dinkhauser Kartonagen 2004” by Jeannot Schwartz.

[9]     Cf. Maryam Hayatshahi, Zur Kategorie der Situation im Denken von Emmanuel Levinas. Inszenierung der Liebe im Zugang des Weiblichen bei Levinas und Hafis, doctoral thesis, Frankfurt am Main 2008, pp. 11f.

[10]    Emmanuel Levinas, De l’évasion, 1982; Engl. On Escape, Stanford 2003 (transl. by Bettina Bergo)

[11]    Erika Fischer-Lichte, Ästhetik des Performativen, Frankfurt am Main 2004. Engl.The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics, London and New York 2008 (transl. by Saskya Iris Jain)

[12]    Ibid.p. 140.In this context the author also describes the link between materiality, signifier and signified in performances since the nineteen-sixties, while taking a particular interest in the semioticity of theatre productions. In her description,the phenomenon in question emerges as contradicting another development that has made visible a tendency towards de-contextualization and de-sementization, e.g. in the theatre since the sixties.

[13]    Ibid.

[14]    Ibid.p. 165

[15]    Ibid. p. 163

[16]    Emmanuel Levinas,Totalité et infini: essai sur l‘extériorité, 1969. Engl. Totality and infinity: an essay on exteriority, Dordrecht 1991, p. 161

思想行動──

一個想像行為的具體痕跡
Thought movements 

Tangible traces of an imagined motion

作者：Verena Konrad    (http://verenakonrad.at/index.html)

翻譯：周浩中

 碰觸一個人時我們同時碰觸自己，並容許我們自身被碰觸。握手，眼神交會的瞬間，姿式gesture以實體呈現出來而可以接觸，凡此皆是 Jeannot Schwartz 藝術思考和創作的基本要素。多年來，這位畫家和表演藝術家一直在處理「碰觸的部位」和身體接觸後留下的痕跡。

 這個設想是基於複雜的觀念結構。以Jeannot Schwartz的作品為例，主要是受到列維納斯Emmanuel Levinas著作的啟發。他在其中發現了一個理論基礎和參考的恆定點。諸如“自我”和“他者”的詞彙，不只與列維納斯本身的社會存有學及人類學的省思相關，也在至今為止無數20世紀理論思想家的的論述中，扮演重要的角色；同時也涵繞了諸如以下的論題：同一性與差異性(otherness)以及tertiality (第三次式？)，亦即：在群集中第三者的的位置。(譯按：只能藉由其他內含物來理解的關係relationships can only be understood in terms of other inclusions) 

德國哲學家 Michael Theunissen 在他取得大學任教資格的論文〈他者：當代社會存有學的研究 The other: studies on the social ontology of the present〉中，從互為主體性和對話哲學的某些規律著手，探討了「我(selfness)」和「他者(otherness)」詞語的相互依賴性。自我或他者是以什麼方式建構的？藉著連結和分離這兩個語詞，以及它們的先決條件，Theunissen除了討論別的論題外，還將它們「影響下的人類自我感知、我們與世界及複雜社會形態的關係」 納入討論。我和你之間的關係，及相遇、對話、溝通和互動等中心概念，一直出現於互為主體性和社會性的討論之中。自此之後，「他者」在理論中佔有固定的位置，並為無數哲學論文所採用；例如：Bernhard Waldenfel　的〈他者的刺戳The sting of the other〉、或其現象學研究〈拓樸學與他者Topography of the other〉和〈正常化的邊界Borders of normalisation〉，這些都有系統地闡釋了這論述的政治和社會面向。

Jeannot Schwartz 的全部作品中，這些自我與他者的相關位置來自沉思的辯証作用。在連續的創作進程中，同一性和差異性、自我和他者，在反思的過程中不是被統合，就是以分析的方式區隔開來，以便最終在實際的藝術活動中再度統合入與對方的相互關係中，而其中以表演方式呈現的也同時成為社會活動。
 

除了「自我」、「他者」、或「面容countenance」這些關係外，Jeannot Schwartz的作品尤其特別強調位置和身體接觸這件事。它們處理的是對情境和日常經驗的感知及反省，這些情境和日常經驗事後會在生理和心智上留下痕跡。

美學實踐和政治行為Aesthetic practice and political action
Jeannot Schwartz的畫和他的抓握雕塑grasp sculpture 正好標誌了這種位置和身體的接觸。許多年來，這位藝術家一直實驗手的抓握動作。他中空的抓握形式，也嘗試運用在表演當中，這時面對集體的試驗裝置，他喜歡投身於再製定的過程(he likes to subject to a re-enactment process in collective test set-ups)，這一點在當代藝術場景中十分難得。就像極少數的藝術家，Jeannot Schwartz有能力將理論性的省思直接轉化為基要體驗。表演過程中呈現的物件，概念上顯得直接而不突兀。同時，它們並不佔據最重要的位置，而不過是某種形式之自我覺知(self-awareness)的載具；與我們日常生活對物品的接觸相反，Jeannot Schwartz的物件是由抓握的衝動開始，且由手本身開始，進而產生的反思形式，這些形式往往與抓握的動作相關。換言之，抓握的手在此處自身成為反思的客體，如此可以想像手當中的虛的空間，而生理接觸的位置、和抓握及手的擬態皆被表明。手中虛的空間，不止是指稱一個表明空缺的位置，也指向了像這樣的抓握潛能potential of grasping。

2007年，Jeannot Schwartz為在因斯布魯克大學的神學教職員的Kunst im Gang畫廊、進一步發展了這樣的試驗裝備。〈毗連的地平線adjoining horizons(註一)〉的裝置包含了一個欄杆扶手安置在一個迴廊裡，然後就像這樣，請參訪者一面握著扶手一面沿著扶欄走動。值得一提的是參與者，除了他們個人的經驗之外，同時拓展了一個並行的反思；這是由在行走和抓握的同時、宣讀簡短的出場聲明而促成的；因此每個參與者面對自己的經驗暨相反的、另一個人的經驗。以名為〈斷言的位置Place of assertion〉(kooio forum für kunst und kommunikation, Innsbruck, 2010)的表演計畫為例，在演出的某些情境下，個人經驗的精確表明(articulation)也是一個重要的面向。在這個例子中，隱喻的詞彙「Behauptung斷言」某事(物)，涉及了「Haup頭」。其作法是將物件放在頭上，換言之，這表演也指向「Behauptung」(在此脈絡中意指「斷言」assertion)，由於物件被放置頭上，使每個人在凝視和觀察時顯得困難起來 ( 譯按：因此影響了斷言的立場 )。在2000年，Jeannot Schwartz做了他的〈門把〉，這是在因斯布魯克大學藝術史學院內的裝置作品，落實為教職員辦公室門上的實際門把，同時將一個人對抓握行為的持續反思 轉化為行動。2005年，在因斯布魯克藝術館Kunstpavillon演出的〈集體的試驗〉中，集體參與的抓握實驗同時包括了言詞表達。這次表演中，Schwartz曾在2004年與一家因斯布魯克工廠員工一起演練過的兩件作品〈以雙手行動的結構〉和〈以雙手的拇指和食指抓捏〉，再次發表演出。
要了解Jeannot Schwartz的作品，很重要的一點是他對審美經驗的取徑。這個經驗緊密的和過程經驗experience of processuality連結在一起。Schwartz的藝術實踐指向反思的

片刻moments of reflection，也唯有透過個人的經驗和具體的行動，才能獲得我們稱為「思想行動movement of thought」之物的基石。照例，具體的行動在他作為藝術家的工作中扮演主要的角色。「思維是行動。在此脈絡下，我們同時必須處理 做為行動的符號/結構問題。」Jeannot Schwartz這麼說。作為動作的姿式和作為(針對可見物)隱喻的意象image，是兩個不同的範疇，或可解讀為 介於美學實踐和政治行動之間的沉思行為。

生存於情境中Living in situations
Jeannot Schwartz的表演作品可以被描述為情境的製定enactments of situations。「情境」在 Emmanuel Levinas的哲學中也佔有一席位置。事實上他形容自己的現象學取徑是一個具體情境的制定。人的存在，本質上連繫著情境的體驗。我們無法迴避它們，不妨這樣說，我們總是「在情境中」。Levinas在早期著作《論逃避On Escape》指出了此一必然性。正如我們無從迴避我們的存在，我們也無能逃避這一存在的情境活動situativity。即使這些情境經驗是個人事件，也沒有分割的、互不相干的情境。情境活動主要透過我們與週遭環境的交流、透過我們自身在關係網絡中的存有經驗而產生。這些都已經暗示了與「他者」的關連。在他的/她的情境狀態中識別他者，意謂去感知他的/她的「外表(visage臉)」，把他/她當作情境構作中的人物。因此，情境思維也就是關係思維。關係作用遍佈我們生活中。正如情境一樣，關係網絡經由我們相互關連的關係活動突顯出來。就情境而論，這樣的關係配置，涉及我們的形體存在。與他者的關係和我們自己形體存在的經驗，其本身也是情境，然而它可能是瞬間短暫的、因此不可能成為現實的處境real situatedness。

如果Jeannot Schwartz的實驗構作在此被描述為思維的行動，只要記住這基本的情境常態以及從中引發的關係，那麼這思維的行動會真的發生。情境活動意謂介於內在與外在的沉思，介於我們內在的感知作用和我們對外在世界所感知到的、兩者間的沉思。這一感知作用在Schwartz的藝術例子中被反映為一個審美進程，他將之安插於姿式與意像之間、動作與觀看之間、以及主動與被動之間。
Erika Fischer-Lichte在其著作《表演的轉化力量The Transformative Power of Performance》中描述，最近數十年來表演藝術家在所有事物中，如何處理物質性materiality和象徵作用的問題。而他在一個小節中描寫的現象同時適用於Jeannot Schwartz的作品。「一旦感受到它們的物質性，這些分離的、突現的現象便在感知主體中引發豐富的聯想、觀念、思想、記憶、和情緒，促使他們與各種各樣其它現象產生關聯。它們顯然被感知為涉及不同觀念和脈絡的意符，並可與一系列意指相連繫。不同元素的個別材料由此產生無限多數的潛在意義。」在此文章裡，作者也論及姿式的意義和易讀性，尤其談到姿式的自我-指涉性質。「因此姿式意謂的只是它所表演的。」基本重點在於分開姿式與它的象徵內容；從而將姿式看成動作、或將它看作真正突顯出來的存有現象：即作為現象的存有。這種差異允許了本質上不同的審美經驗。

對自我與他者的探索Exploring the self and the other
在Jeannot Schwartz以抓握動作進行的表演實驗中，每一位參與者都得設法完成作業，通常是根據一定姿式的再制定，這時觀眾自身就變成主動的。這項作業通常包含簡短的指示；或者在門把的例子中，包含了利用抓握衝動為起點，全然日常動作的重複。
這兒有一個重要因素 自動技法autopoiesis，Erika Fischer-Lichte將它形容為一種回饋迴路，其作用像「必須不斷地結合新近浮現、無計畫的、不可預料因素的自我-組織系統。」自動技法 緊密地關連到涉入者的感知；而藉此做為群體或個體的觀眾、以及表演藝術家，得以將他們自身作為主體和主動的媒介來體驗。由(旁觀)觀眾到行動個體的轉變，必然對表演的開展十分重要，而且自1960年代以來一直是表演藝術基本不變的常例，並可在當代劇場找到相符相應的例子。「藝術家們將他們自己和其他人曝露到其所創造的無法控制的情境…。」如今，在表演藝術中，自然有極為不同的取徑方式和策略，尤其是一件以社會和政治身體做為起點的表演藝術，更是特別不一樣。不過，Jeannot Schwartz的作品還是有一個重要的相符要素，可以從他的概念途徑推論出來──就是：減約化reduction。Schwartz將抓握實驗運用到很小但高度意涵的一塊塊形體上、運用了源自胡塞爾Edmund Husserl和現象學的本質還原eidetic reduction(註二)方法，而發現某種像藝術對應體(counterpart註三)的東西，由於清晰了然而十分具有說服力。

記憶與感受性Memory and sensibility
Jeannot Schwartz的畫、他的抓握雕塑、和他的表演配備，除了上述的要素之外，還包含了痕跡trace的概念。這些痕跡不但是他自己的姿式和觸覺在形塑材料的過程中遺留下來的，也是透過集體或個別的再製定行為中，對這些形式的沉思而留下的。手的抓握行為、壓印後留下的、以及手的觸摸，這些都是Schwartz描述世界、促成並反思審美經驗這一藝術方法的主要元素；這個審美經驗同時一直是政治經驗political experience。以隱喻和日常用語的方式來探究抓握本身的意涵，可看出最重要的關聯：抓握某物、以侵犯的aggressive或恰當的appropriating行為碰觸某物、或者以收受和探索的意義抓取seizing某物。列維納斯論及手的抓握：「手理解comprehend事物，並非透過同時在所有方位碰觸它(手並未全面摸透它)，而是透過不再是感覺器官的手，不再是純粹的享受、純粹的感官性質，卻是控制、主宰、安排──這些並不屬於感覺序階──的手。」

否定和具體化Negation and concretion

手作為觸摸的工具只是此處論及的一個面向而已，對Jeannot Schwartz來說，他對抓握的探究遠遠超越了對物體的感受或塑形。抓握的空虛空間、當中的空位，也屬於手的觸摸；而最終反思觸摸的位置，這一點使得他的作品越過觸摸的行為而進入到過程中，在這過程中，藉著再製作和再感受，動作和思維跟著被引發。 

1999年，在弗萊堡藝術家協會the Kunstverein Freiburg，一個題為〈繪畫零點的實驗〉的藝術家談話場合上，Schwartz這樣說：「門把的接觸表面，是包覆抓握的手而形成的formed over the grasping hand。它們既是手抓握的物體，同時也邀引手去抓握它自己。在後一個情境中，空脫了另一組件──門片，因而不期然地造成面對面的遭遇 face to  face confrontation。」而面孔face是Emmanuel Levinas哲學的中心概念，他在論述自我與他者的關係時，給予特別的重視。繪畫的零點，由面孔組成，且是轉化(translation)和脫離圖畫平面的行動，進而助長個人的經驗 ( 譯按：指藝術家由早期的面孔系列平面繪畫，轉向後來的創作途徑 )。不管怎樣，他的取徑與繪畫的關係重大。這可以由Schwartz在畫中對姿式面向gestural aspect的精準覺知顯示出來。其中圖畫空間扮的角色，正好是這空間下的繪畫動作所示(the picture space plays as much of a role as the acting within this space does)。結合了審美經驗和政治反思political reflection的藝術作品過程中，姿式與視覺，兩者相互呼應吻合。

維列娜‧康拉德

Verena Konrad  

譯註：
註一：Horizons 另有(知識, 經驗等的)範圍； 眼界； 視野等意思。

註二：本質還原(eidetic reduction)

(下載自奇跡百科http://www.qiji.cn/baike/Detailed/13662.html)

這是胡塞爾用來表示朝向本質或普遍性的直觀行為的詞，與經驗直觀或感性知覺相对而言。他也將這種行為稱作本性直觀、本質直觀或本質變更。在希臘語中，eideo意味着「看」，而被看到的則是一个eidos或「本質」（柏拉圖的 「形相」或「理念」），即經驗中多個存在者或規則性的共同特性。對柏拉圖而言，“eidos”意味着被靈魂之眼所看到的東西，也就是本質。胡塞爾也將這種行為稱為「觀念直觀」(ideation，又可譯為「观念化」)，因為ideo與eideo同義，在希臘文中也意味着「看」。相應地，idea(觀念化本 質)也等同於eidos本質。
本質還原是接着先驗還原或現象學還原的步驟，有時被認為是現象學還原本身的第二階段。先驗還原將我們提到先驗領域，將經驗意識變為先驗的或純粹的意識。對於胡塞爾來說，一個先驗意識行為的本質還原透及本质。这是一個獲得本質洞察的程序，使我們能够與一般的或普遍的知識發生認識聯繫。這種還原的結果是一個對於普遍性看得更為清晰明確的意識。這種還原或直觀是一個被規則主宰的、而且時常與直接的直觀相抵觸的行為。在本質直觀中，我們並不集中於被知覺的實例，而是這個實例體現出的本質。因此，理解這個還原就可表明我們如何超越了基礎經驗的隨機性並抽取出了本質的東西。
註三：對應體理論（Counterpart theory）

(下載自奇跡百科http://www.qiji.cn/baike/Detailed/13662.html)

一種可以追溯到萊布尼茨的理論，但新近由D‧劉易斯發展出来對付跨世界的同一性問題。在劉易斯看來，一個個體只能存在於眾多可能世界的一個中，因為一事物在一個時間内只能存在於一個地方。没有任何東西能够居住於一個以上的世界中。所以個體是有世界制約的，在不同的世界中根本没有同一的個體。那麼，對一個有世界制約的個體，我們如何去分析可能的或不可能的東西呢？劉易斯主張，個體在其他世界中有對應體，雖然不等同於它們在现實世界中的對應體，但它們比所在世界中的其他事物更類似於這些對應體。它們使得對現實世界W中的任何事物X，它在W。中的對應體X恰像在W中 的X所是的樣子，假如事物的不同正像W和Wn之間事物的不同的話。跨世界的相似正是對應體關係，因而是跨世界的同一性的替代物。

譯後：

關於幾個名詞的翻譯： 

Thought movement 
這個詞到底該怎麼翻呢？
原來翻譯成思想運動，譯完全稿，覺得思想太偏於靜態，遂以思維代之。而運動又範圍太大，曾一度改譯為律動，又太偏重於規律及線狀的旋律擺動；兩者也不若動作來的具體。譯為思維動作，正好表示把思維的抽象運作落實到具體的動態世界來。但仍然覺得不足，似乎一方面Thought 包含了思想、思考、思維；另一方面movement也包含了運動、動作、律動的意思，指思想的運作過程。最後勉強譯為思想行動。

guesture 姿式
無論譯為姿勢、姿態或動作，都只呈現這個詞在這文本中的一個面向，不夠周全。
姿勢，太過於靜態抽象；姿態，又過於具體和生活化；動作又未免狹窄了些。最後決定翻譯成姿式，涵蓋廣又有稍稍具體的動作樣式，似乎比較貼合對Jeannot品的描述。



Artistic counterpart
若以字典定義直譯，就是藝術副本、或藝術相當之物、相似之物。

其真正意思是，一個對等於藝術的東西。為什麼這樣說呢？因為所有作為最後成品呈現的Schwartz的作品，其實是他完整的藝術表演或藝術概念的一個最終切片。他的藝術目標不是這成品，而是整個從頭到尾展現的過程。所以最終固著下來的，無法單獨稱之為藝術或藝術品。這是何以作者稱之為 artistic counterpart；藝術對等物，一個相當於藝術的東西；既是又不完全是藝術，介於藝術和某種實際運作之間。
這樣的說法，等與告訴我們並給予Schwartz的藝術無限寬廣的天地、也給作為觀眾、欣賞者的我們無限寬廣的天地 。

enactment / re-enactment

 原指法律的制訂和再制定。這兒指Schwartz對與表演、所需裝置以及情境的設計與制定；而再制定則是觀眾在參與操作時，經由實際體驗，本身重新再度做出了屬於自身的形式與內容。