最受期待的私人當代藝術館洛城開館
LOS ANGELES — Traditional art museums are some of the most conservative and controlling institutions on earth. They are built as vaults to preserve the past, and as monuments to edited histories. In the Gilded Age America of a century or so ago, many new museums were also monuments to private collectors — Henry Clay Frick, J. P. Morgan, Isabella Stewart Gardner — who strove to shape and fix an image that history would have of them, as enlightened power brokers of their day and benefactors to the future.
洛杉磯——傳統藝術博物館是世界上最保守、最具控制力的機構之一。它們是儲存過去時光的貯藏室，也是用來編纂歷史的紀念碑。在百餘年前正處於鍍金時代的美國，許多新建的博物館也是私人收藏家的豐碑——亨利·克雷·弗裏克(Henry Clay Frick)、J·P·摩根(J. P. Morgan)、伊莎貝拉·斯圖爾特·加德納(Isabella Stewart Gardner)——他們努力把自己打造爲當時開明的權力影響者，乃至對未來世界的饋贈者，希望以這樣的歷史形象定格於人們心目中。
In our present Gilded Age, private collection museums are again proliferating, but with a difference. Most are devoted to new art, art without a past. The stories they tell are not yet history, but exist in a state of flux. The very definition of collecting, in a time of speculative buying, is now up for grabs. Shouldn’t these changes radically alter the old museum model, loosen it up, make it more experimental, shift its identity from locked treasure house to clearinghouse for fresh ideas?
在我們當今的鍍金時代，私人收藏博物館再一次興起，但又有所不同。大多數私人收藏家專注於新藝術，沒有歷史的藝術。博物館講述的故事還未變爲歷史，而是存在於一種不斷流動的狀態中。“收藏”的定義在投機購買的時代不再分明。這些變化是否會給舊有的博物館模式帶來巨大的改變，是否會讓它更鬆散、更富於試驗性，從保存珍寶的帶鎖房間變成新鮮觀念的交易所呢？
These questions arise as one of the most eagerly anticipated private museums of contemporary art in the country approaches its opening here next week.
下週，全國最受期待的私人當代藝術館之一即將在這裏開放，這些問題又浮現出來。
Called The Broad (pronounced brode) and housed in a $140 million, three-story building by Diller, Scofidio and Renfro, it enshrines the collection of some 2,000 works owned by Eli and Edythe Broad, two of this city’s leading philanthropists.
這家藝術館名叫“布洛德”(The Broad)，坐落在Diller, Scofidio and Renfro建築事務所旁邊一棟價值1.4億美元的三層樓建築之內。它藏有2000件左右的作品，屬於伊萊(Eli)與埃德斯·布洛德(Edythe Broad)，他們是本市首屈一指的慈善家。
Mr. Broad, a billionaire who made his fortune in home building, has arguably had more impact shaping this city’s cultural identity than anyone else in recent times. For nearly 50 years, he and his wife have been among the country’s most assiduous contemporary collectors. They began picking up work by hot young artists — Jean-Michel Basquiat, Cindy Sherman — in Manhattan in the early 1980s, later filling in historical blanks and doing some buying in their own California backyard.
布洛德先生是一位靠家裝起家的億萬富翁，有人認爲在最近一個時代裏，他對這個城市的文化身份帶來的影響比任何人都大。將近50年裏，他和妻子一直都是美國最爲孜孜不倦的當代藝術收藏家。20世紀80年代初，在曼哈頓，他們從收集讓-米切爾·巴斯奎特(Jean-Michel Basquiat)和辛迪·舍曼(Cindy Sherman)等當紅年輕藝術家的作品開始，後來漸漸填補歷史空白，在兩人加利福尼亞州的大本營做些採購。
The inaugural display is clearly intended to show the collection in representative form, and does. The museum’s founding director and chief curator, Joanne Heyler, has installed some 200 works more or less chronologically on the building’s skylighted third floor, beginning with a clutch of classic pieces by Jasper Johns, Robert Rauschenberg and Cy Twombly. Mr. Johns’s 1964 “Watchman” is a star; a blood-red Rauschenberg abstraction from a decade earlier is less familiar, but the Broads cashed in a Van Gogh drawing to acquire it.
博物館的開幕展顯然旨在以最有代表性的形式來展現他們的收藏，也的確起到了很好的效果。博物館的創建指導、首席策展人喬安妮·海勒(Joanne Heyler)在館內有天窗照明的三樓展示了200餘件作品，主要是按年代排序，以賈斯珀·約翰斯(Jasper Johns)、羅伯特·勞森貝格(Robert Rauschenberg)和賽·託姆佈雷(Cy Twombly)的一系列經典之作開始。約翰斯1964年的《守望者》(Watchman)是重點作品；勞森貝格十幾年前創作的一幅血紅色的抽象畫比較罕爲人知，但卻是布洛德夫婦用一幅梵高的作品換回來的。
Andy Warhol, whose Campbell’s Soup Can pictures Ms. Broad first saw (but didn’t buy) as early as the 1960s, has a small gallery of his own; Roy Lichtenstein has a larger one. He is a Broad favorite; they own 34 pieces (there are 10 here), as is his successor in formally polished Pop, Jeff Koons, of whose works the Broads have the greatest number in private hands. Is this something to brag about? An argument can be made that Mr. Koons’s work usefully casts a cold eye on an American, and now global, addiction to bright, empty, throwaway things. But what happens when a presumably critical art is indistinguishable from its target, or is not critical after all? Then chances are good it’s headed for history’s scrap heap, eventually if not now.
早在60年代，布洛德夫人就見過安迪·沃霍爾(Andy Warhol)的坎貝爾湯罐頭組圖，不過沒有買下。當時沃霍爾擁有一個自己的小畫廊；羅伊·利希滕斯坦(Roy Lichtenstein)則擁有一個大一點的畫廊。沃霍爾是布洛德藝術館的最愛，布洛德夫婦擁有他的34幅作品（本次展出了10幅），此外還有他在正規波普藝術中的後繼者傑夫·昆斯(Jeff Koons)的作品，布洛德夫婦是昆斯作品最大的私人藏家。這難道不值得誇耀嗎？有人認爲，美國迷戀光彩、空洞的一次性物品，如今更是擴展到全球，昆斯的作品正是對這種現象的冷眼旁觀。但是如果一種可能意味着批判的藝術與它所批判的對象變得難以區分，又會怎樣呢？抑或它根本不是一種批判？那麼它很有可能最終會走入歷史的垃圾堆，即便不是發生在現在。
Speaking of critical commentary, in an inspired compare-and-contrast move, Ms. Heyler has inserted a 1995 panoramic city painting by the Los Angeles artist Lari Pittman into the Koons gallery. Mr. Pittman’s work, too, comes out of a Pop corner and is formally airtight. It’s also conceptually razor-sharp. It deals with all the American subjects Mr. Koons does — sex, religion, celebrity, death — but with a focus and bite that he lacks.
說到批判性評論，海勒運用自己的靈感，採取了對比的做法，把洛杉磯藝術家拉里·皮特曼(Lari Pittman)一幅1995年的城市全景油畫放到昆斯的作品中去。皮特曼的作品也是來自波普藝術界，被密封着。它在概念上也非常犀利，昆斯所使用的全部美國主題——性、信仰、名人與死亡——皮特曼也全部涉獵，不過帶有昆斯所缺乏的重點和刺激性。
The concentration of Los Angeles art is the most interesting aspect of the inaugural show, at least for this East Coast viewer. Ed Ruscha’s laconically meticulous word paintings and John Baldessari’s recycled film images may fit the collection’s clean-lined Pop proclivities, while the acidic zaniness of Mike Kelley’s work does not, but the Broads bought plenty of it over the years. I’m always glad to see it, and I’m even gladder to encounter things I’ve never seen, like the sculpture called “Bateau de Guerre” by the apocalypse-minded Chris Burden, who died in May. A whirring, blinking death star made of gas cans and toy guns, it wasn’t in the recent Burden retrospective that came to New York.
這場開幕展最有意思的一個特點是，它關注洛杉磯藝術，至少對於一位來自東海岸的觀者是這樣的。艾德·拉斯查(Ed Ruscha)簡潔而注重細節的單詞畫，以及約翰·巴爾代薩里(John Baldessari)的回收膠片圖像頗爲適合該展覽鮮明的波普傾向；邁克·凱利(Mike Kelley)的迷幻瘋狂之作雖然並不是波普，但布洛德夫妻多年來也買下了很多。看到它一直都讓我很高興，而看到那些我從未見過的作品就讓我更高興，比如具有末世意識的藝術家克里斯·伯頓(Chris Burden)的雕塑《戰艦》(Bateau de Guerre)，他於5月逝世。這是一顆呼嘯閃爍的死亡之星，由瓦斯罐與玩具槍製成，近期來到紐約的伯頓回顧展並沒有收入它。
I wish there were more things like it here, under-known, offbeat, less than neat. And there could be. With a reported $200- million-plus endowment and additional funds for acquisitions — nearly that of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art and the Museum of Contemporary Art combined — the Broad will be doing a lot more buying. And it would be good if this museum started to stray from the blue-chip-masterpiece path that winds its way from Mr. Koons on the third floor to a gallery on the first floor of big, bland, abstract pictures by Mark Grotjahn and Christopher Wool, artists who, because they cover walls with work that is indisputably “art,” have become universal collection staples.
我希望能有更多類似這樣的展覽：鮮爲人知、不落俗套，不那麼整齊。這是完全有可能的。據報道，布洛德藝術館擁有2億多美元的基金和其餘款項，用於收購藏品，大約相當於洛杉磯鄉村藝術博物館(Los Angeles County Museum of Art)與當代藝術館(Museum of Contemporary Art)的總和，因此他們會進行更多收購。如果藝術館不再走收購著名傑作路線，不再買下那麼多三樓收藏的昆斯，乃至一樓的馬克·格洛特雅恩(Mark Grotjahn)和克里斯托弗·伍爾(Christopher Wool)等藝術家那種大大的、平庸的、抽象的作品，那就更好了，因爲這些藝術家都是用無可爭辯的“藝術”來覆蓋牆壁，早已成了各種展覽的固定項目。
Their presence here makes the Broad feel ordinary, old-school, predictable. A tight, unadventurous building design doesn’t help. The exterior, with its sheets of perforated, biomorphic white cladding — the color and texture of gefilte fish — is eye-filling but unmagical, though there are nice touches inside. The cavernlike lobby sets up a mood of mystery. The third floor skylights are a pleasure, as are occasional breaks in the white-box gallery walls that give glimpses onto the street.
它們的出現令布洛德顯得平凡、老派，沒有出人意料之處。結構緊湊、毫無冒險精神的藝術館建築更是沒有幫助。建築外觀是穿孔的薄片，覆蓋着白色的生物形態塗層——這是猶太魚丸的質地與顏色——它足夠吸引眼球，卻並不神奇。不過內部有一些漂亮的設計，洞穴般的大廳有種神祕色彩。三樓的天窗很不錯，此外白盒子般的牆壁上偶有裂隙，可以一窺街景。
The street is Grand Avenue, which Mr. Broad, in consultation with the city government, has long planned to develop into a downtown cultural district. The Broad is part of that plan. So is the Frank Gehry-designed Walt Disney Concert Hall next door to it, and the Museum of Contemporary Art, which Mr. Broad helped found and has generously supported, directly across the street. In a stretched-out, traffic-clogged city it takes a long time to travel anywhere. You need a good reason to go where you’re going. By offering free admission, Mr. Broad intends his museum to be a popular destination.
藝術館下面是格蘭德大道，布洛德先生早有計劃，將這裏發展爲藝術區，目前正在與市政府磋商。布洛德藝術館自然也是該計劃的一部分，還有隔壁由弗蘭克·蓋裏(Frank Gehry)設計的沃爾特·迪士尼音樂廳，以及坐落在街對面，由布洛德先生協助創立並慷慨支持的當代藝術館。在這樣一個擁堵的大城市，去哪裏都要花很長的時間。想去什麼地方真得有個好理由不可。布洛德先生的藝術館是免票進入的，他希望這裏成爲一個受歡迎的好地方。
It surely will be while it’s new, and in the news, and could continue to be. The Broads have always viewed their holdings as a public asset that they make accessible through an active institutional loan program. They refer to their holdings as a lending library, with items regularly leaving for other museums and returning. This traffic flow, enhanced by the arrival of new acquisitions, should encourage people to make repeat visits, knowing they are likely to see new things each time.
當它還新鮮，是新聞的時候，這當然沒問題，它也有可能持續受人歡迎。布洛德夫婦一直都覺得自己的藏品是屬於公衆的財富，所以他們通過一個活躍的公共貸款項目，讓公衆可以看到這些藏品。他們把自己的藏品當做一個租賃圖書館，經常把藏品借給其他藝術館展出，與其他藝術館互相借還。這種交流由於新藏品，得到了進一步加強，人們知道經常能看到新展品，肯定會願意常常再來參觀。
But even with this mechanism for flexibility, the Broad is a museum of an old-fashioned kind. It’s been built to preserve a private collection conceived on a masterpiece ideal and consisting almost entirely of distinctive objects: paintings and sculptures; precious things. Apart from most of the objects being new, or at least not old, the Broad could have existed, pretty much as is, a century ago.
但是就算有這種結構上的流動性，布洛德仍然屬於那種老式的博物館。它的建造是用來儲存私人收藏，其中都是傑作典範，而且基本只有兩種形式：繪畫和雕塑；它們都是珍寶。除了擁有最新的藏品，或者那些至少不古老的藏品，布洛德藝術館好像本應當存在於一個世紀之前，也非常像百年之前的東西。
But, of course, art itself has changed. It is no longer only about things, hasn’t been for decades. Since the great surge of dematerialization introduced by conceptualism in the 1960s, art has been about, among other things, ideas, actions, sounds, performance, networks, communication. The Broad will have to catch up with this alternative history, a history that the audience it wants to attract and hold already knows. What better way to do so than through collaboration with an institution that has a stake in exploring the same history, meaning, of course, the Museum of Contemporary Art across the street.
但是，當然，藝術本身也在改變。幾十年來，它已經不再只是關於事物。隨着60年代概念主義帶來的非物質化大潮，藝術已經變成了觀念、行爲、聲音、表演、網絡與交流。布洛德藝術館應當抓住這種另類歷史，這種歷史所希望吸引和抓住的觀衆已經深深瞭解了它。最好的辦法，莫過於和另一個同樣應當探索這段歷史的機構合作，當然，我是指街對面的當代藝術館。
The two could share, to their mutual benefit, space, expertise and personnel. What they already share is a tough time for museums and a history with Mr. Broad, who, over a tireless half-century, has done wonders for art in this city, and, with the opening of his museum, is about to do more.
爲了共同利益，兩家藝術館應當分享空間、專業知識與員工。目前，它們所分享的不過是藝術館都要面對的艱難時光，以及與布洛德先生的淵源。布洛德先生不知疲倦地努力了半個世紀，已經爲這座城市的藝術締造了奇蹟，現在有了自己的藝術館，他還會做出更多貢獻。
