童先生的作品我很久以前就有耳闻，虽然人并没有见过，这次来集中看到了童先生的作品，我也注意到他在一些文章中的一些自己的表述，他比较强调受到中国传统艺术的影响。

　　但他作品中的一点在我看来并非传统影响，中国传统肖像画比较多的集中在“传神”，顾恺之在《名画记》里面谈到的“传神写照，尽在阿堵之中”。“阿堵”就是眼睛，中国传统艺术（肖像画）是强调用眼神来传达一个人的精神气质的，但童先生的大多肖像是把眼睛（眼神）加以忽略，基本上把眼神作为一个比较虚化的处理，也就是说把“阿堵”放弃了。那么他人物的“神”又是通过什么来表达呢？我觉得他的方式就是通过整体肖像的气质来表达，通过他的结构处理、通过奔放的笔触来表达肖像的气质。这个气质与其说是被画模特的气质，不如说是表达画家的气质。

　　作为艺术家可以有很多种自我的阐述，从批评的角度、从观看者的角度也不一定完全能够同意作者的表述，我不知道作者自己表达的是不是强调一种“零度”的写作态度？是一种“无我”状态？我们知道无论写作的“零度”，还是“无我”也好，这些都是后现代的典型表述方式，而童雁汝南的艺术从表现来说它基本上还是属于现代主义时期的表达。

　　另一方面，作为现代主义特质之一的“表现”，其本身也和“无我”状态相抵触的，因为这里的“无我”不是王国维的“无我”，而是去中心、去个人的，而“表现”本身是有个人、有中心的，在这点上我当然更认同后者，就是表现是通过自我的表现，他并不是给肖像的主人来传神，而是传你（艺术家）自己的神。

　　“一花一世界”本是中国禅宗的表达方法，其实是要说“一粒微尘、一根汗毛端，里头有整个宇宙的信息”。这种具体而微、管中窥豹的观察方法其实也不适应于对童雁作品的解读，他画面为对象传神我认为已经是次要的了，更重要的是传你个人要表达的东西，我觉得这个点才是童雁汝南的肖像画非常显著的特点，在这里，对象已经变成为你服务了，严格意义来说这样的一种肖像画已经有一种“去对象”的效果，如果从艺术的基本出发点来说，这是非常符合规律的。

Whose mien is Tong Yanrunan express in his works?

Gu Chengfeng

　　I have heard of Mr. Tong's works for a long time though I haven't seen him before. It is the occasion that I appreciate Mr. Tong's works. I have also noticed some of his expressions in some articles. He emphasizes the influence of traditional Chinese art.

　　But I think his works does not seem to be influenced by tradition from a certain angle. Chinese traditional portraits are mostly concentrated on "vividness", as Gu Kaizhi said "vivid portraits, all in E Du" in A Tale of Famous Paintings. "E Du" refers to the eyes. Chinese traditional art (portrait painting) emphasizes that using eyes to convey a person's spiritual temperament. However, most of portraits made by Mr. Tong ignore the eyes (expressions in one's eyes). He basically regards the eyes as a more empty treatment. In other words, "E Du" is abandoned. So how the "mien" of character is expressed? I think it is the overall temperament of portrait that he expresses through his structural treatments, and bold and unrestrained brush strokes. This temperament is more an expression of the artist's temperament than the temperament of the model being painted.

　　As an artist, there are many kinds of self-explanations. From the perspective of criticism and the viewer, it is not always possible to agree the author's statement entirely. I don't know if the author's self-expression emphasizes a zero-degree writing attitude. Is it an "egoless" state? We know that both "zero degree" of writing and "egoless" state are the typical expressions of post-modern. Basically, the art of Tong Yanrunan belongs to the expression of the modernist period.

　　On the other hand, as one of the characteristics of modernism, "expression" itself is also incompatible with the "egoless" state. The "egoless" state is not the same as what Wang Guowei put forward about "egoless" state. It is de-centering and de-personal, while "expression" itself is personal and centering. Certainly I prefer to agree with the latter, which is expressed through ego. In other words, the artist does not convey the spirit of who is portrayed, but the mien of you (the artist).

　　"To see a world in a flower" is the expression of Chinese Zen Buddhism. In fact, it means "a tiny dust, or a hairy end, is full with the information of the whole universe". This concrete and small observation method, which has a limited view of one portrait conjures up the whole through seeing a part of it, is not suitable for the interpretation of Tongyan's works either. I think that one's mien is displayed through the vivid screen is secondary for an artist. More importantly, it is to convey what you want to express personally. I think this point is a very remarkable feature of portraits made by Tong yanrunan. Here, the object has become a service for you. As a result, strictly speaking, the portrait has already had the effect of "de-object", which is very consistent with the law from the basic starting point of art.