主题阐释：“流动的社群”
此次双年展的主题展“流动的社群”，主要侧重对主流社会之外人群的存在状态和精神状况的关注。
中国“当代艺术”尽管在商业上和国际化上很成功，但与中国的本土现实总体上还是脱节的。当代艺术只有真正的参与中国社会的进程和精神状况的改进，表达中国的精神现实，从本土的精神现实寻求它自身的形式，而不是直接拿来西方的形式改造，使语言形式真正与传统的根源建立联系，中国的“当代艺术”才会具有真正的创造力，也才能真正被中国社会所认同。
“流动的社群”在含义上试图探讨这样一些指向：
（一）民间“流动性”
社会的改变在于民间的流动性。任何主流体系都在于承认结果，但人群在主流之外的流动、游牧、变迁，以及通过追求自由和想象驱使的行为状态的变化，一方面，改变了个人与群体之间的总体关系；另一方面，人群之间也重新在体系之外形成了新的网络，并最终带来社会结构的改变，以及总体意识的新观念。
这是新文化和新艺术产生的基础，即存在状态重新定义艺术的价值取向和形式。“当代艺术”过于观念化，注重语言与艺术自身观念的关系，而忽视了艺术总体上的变革与生存状态变迁的基本关系。而中国正发生着人的存在状态的根本变化，中国每天都处在一种戏剧性和超现实的流变状态，这种现实的戏剧性和超“现实”性包含了未来艺术的语言模型，及其结构性特征。
当代艺术的语言创造应该向中国的现实学习，如果中国房地产拆迁民居引起的反抗，导致“钉子户”的孤岛形态，可以看作最具原创精神的集体创作的“社会雕塑”，它不是由某一个体的艺术观念导致的，而是各种社会力量因为利益在某一个点上对峙达到的“僵持”状态。这是它的物质外观折射和隐喻了一种社会结构，因此是存在的结构力量导致了新的视觉性的社会景观。
中国社会的流动性和戏剧性变迁，事实上，会给“当代艺术”的重新定义带来启示。
（二）“社群”意识
全球资本主义以及中国的市场经济的奇迹，铸就了更强大的国家体系、金融资本的权力以及全球化的资本、劳动力、信息传播和交通平台，与此对应的是更极致的个人主义。而被弱化和削弱的则是“社群”意识。在共产主义运动失败之后，人们不知道在资本主义和垄断体系之外，如何重建更有意义的社区模式以及社会群体的自主性。
在中国，当代的社群意识还很模糊。首先在于社会和国家没有严格的区分形态，社会没有自己的土地，土地属于国家管辖和支配。对社会而言，土地就像一张可以随时被“抽空”的地毯，社会因此对国家具有一种依附性。改革三十年，中国在个性主义和消费社会的引导下，新一代普遍发展出一种极端的自我中心主义和个人意识，但在强大的国家和个人之间，仍然缺乏明确和自主的“社群”意识。人们的社会自救习惯于求助普遍意义的国家和市场，而不是各种形式的社区，人们对民间社会也不报更高形态的希望。
当代艺术过去十年的主流是热衷于与权力、资本和符号的捆绑和联合，而忽视与民众和民间社会的精神联系。本次双年展强调艺术家的“社群”意识，强调以艺术的名义和方式参与某一个社会主流之外的人群，艺术家自己与一个“社群”建立民间的联系，并因为艺术的名义或方式，对他们的存在形态和“社群”意识有一定的促进作用，至于具体形式和概念是不是“艺术”，则不重要。
在当代艺术商业化过去几年喧嚣的同时，有一些当代艺术家已经实质性的以个人的方式开始了这一进程，比如艾未未以自己的方式调查北川学生死亡情况，南京的艺术家郭海平到精神病院教精神病人绘画，甘肃的艺术家靳勒成为自己村庄的村长，并在村子里建起了当代艺术馆。上海的艺术家原弓参与四川地震的救助并记录了灾区的底层社会的状况。
在社会性题材的艺术领域，上述艺术家的方式应该成为中国当代艺术的一个重要取向。中国“当代艺术”的生存特征决定当代艺术在中国还是要具有一种“庄严性”和“神圣性”，而不是卡通、玩世不恭和“新犬儒主义”。当代艺术的社会语言也要反映中国社会深层现实的精神特征，以及它自身对土地、“社群”和史无前例的流动性及其“悲壮”性的感受特征。
Introduction: “The Drifting Communities”
The name of the main exhibition in this year’s biennial is “The Drifting Communities.” This exhibition focuses on the different forms of existence and behaviors of people outside of the mainstream status quo.
“Contemporary art” in China had achieved phenomenal success in the market and on the international stage. But this thriving representation is in fact very much disjointed from the actual domestic conditions that are happening in China. Only if contemporary art can participate in the actual social development and in the refinement of its present “state of mind,” that is, to express the real psychological conditions in the mainland, and to seek for ways of expression from locally-rooted conditions (and not simply manipulating existing forms of artistic expression that originate from the West, so that a developing language of expression can be truly linked to its tradition), then will Chinese contemporary art be identified as truly innovative and thus be recognized by its society.
“The Drifting Communities” attempts to explore the following tendencies:
1. The “Drifting” in a society
The transformation of a society is based on the idea of drifting in a socially-based environment. Any mainstream status quo is the representation of a compliance of a specific result. But outside of the mainstream, people are drifting, transiting, keeping a nomadic existence, and desiring different ways of living as motivated by the urge for freedom and imagination. All of these activities, on one hand, change the holistic relationship between the individual and the group; on the other hand, a new network is formed by people outside of the mainstream that will ultimately cause change to the main social structure—this enables a new conceptual transformation to take place in the overall social consciousness.
This is the basis for the production of new culture and new art; a basis which can also be translated as a re-interpretation of the value and forms of art as reflected by its own state of existence. Chinese “contemporary art” over-emphasizes conceptualization, with much focus paid to the relationship between language and art’s own self-reflexivity. This focus neglects the basic relationship between art’s continuous transformation as a whole and the shifts that exist in different conditions of existence. People’s lives are undergoing fundamental changes in China. Everyday, different dramatic and surrealistic becomings are found everywhere. The drama and the hyper-real in China contain all the language modes and structural characteristics that are available for the future exploration in art making.
The making of a language in Chinese contemporary art can be enriched from a reflection on the actual conditions that are happening within China. For example, the formation of a “nail household” caused by local resistance against the development of the Chinese real estates; such can be seen as an innovative, artistic collaboration in the making of a “social sculpture.” The “nail household” is not the result of an art project originating from an individual, but a “stalemate” formed by various social forces that happened to meet at a point due to a confrontation of different vested interests. The “nail household” is simply a refracted “thingly” appearance and a metaphor for a social structure; it is actually the inherent structural force that brought forth a new visual social landscape.
The drifting and the dramatic changes that are happening in China will in fact play a crucial role in re-defining the category of Chinese “contemporary art.”
2. A sense of the “Communities”
The miracle of globalized capitalism and China’s market economy has fostered a much stronger nation-system, a powerful financial capital, and a globalized resource, labor force, dissemination of information, and commuting platform; all with a corresponding sense of intense individualism. But what has been weakened and crippled is the awareness of the “communities.” After the failure of the communist movement, people have lost a sense of direction as to how best to rebuild a meaningful model for a self-regulating community outside of a system of capitalism and its associated monopolization.
In contemporary China, community awareness is still a rather blurry concept. One reason for this is because of a lack of strict distinction between the society and the nation-state. The people do not possess their own land, since all land is administrated, distributed, and controlled by the country. From the point of view of the people, the land is like a carpet that can be taken away at any time, so the society has grown to be dependant on the state. During the three decade since the Chinese economic reform, and under the guidance of individualism and socially-driven consumerism, a new generation has developed with an extreme egocentrism and self-awareness, but in between the immensity of the country and the individual subject, a definite and self-regulating “community” mentality is still missing. People lack the sense of self-sufficiency in the society because they have become habitual in appealing for assistance to the state and to the market, both of which can only provide help in the most general way. The people do not appeal to different kinds of local communities for help, as they do not expect to receive any support from them.
Mainstream contemporary art in China in the past ten years had shown a keen interest in the exploration of power, money, and symbols. But it has neglected a close tie with the public and the civil society. This biennial stresses on the idea of the “communities,” and under the banner and through the means of art, this biennial attempts to work with those who are not part of the mainstream, and to help artists in forging a relationship with the “communities” in a society. Under the term art and its different signifying possibilities, this year’s exhibition targets on promoting the artists’ condition of existence and the awareness of the “communities.” It needs to be pointed out that this exhibition is not concerned with whether the specific forms and concepts presented are considered “art” or not.
The clamor of commercializing Chinese contemporary art during the passed few years had also witnessed a number of artists who started paying substantial attention to the need for social participation. For example, Ai Weiwei investigated the casualties of the students at Beichuan; Nanjing artist Guo Haiping taught painting to patients at a psychiatric ward; Gangsu artist Jin Le was the head of a village where he built a contemporary art museum; Shanghai artist Yuan Gong participated in the rescue of the Sichuan earthquake and recorded the situation of the underprivileged in the disaster stricken zone.
In the arts, and under the category of the social, the different engagements initiated by the artists mentioned above are considered important departure points in the field of contemporary art. The present characteristics of Chinese “contemporary art” call for a sense of “reverence” and “sanctity,” and not cartoons, cynicism and “neo-cynicism.” The language of the social in contemporary art must reflect the essential characteristics that originate from a deeper understanding of the reality in China; this language must also be related to the land, to the “communities,” to the unprecedented drift in mobility, and to the unique expressions of “tragedy” that exist today.
