開放的虛空—論李光裕雕塑的形式語言、藝術觀念與當代價值

文/楊心一博士 國際策展人、美國康乃爾大學藝術史博士

作為台灣藝術史上第二代雕塑家的代表人物，李光裕在台灣藝術界成名甚早，他的藝術成就早在上世紀90年代已得到學術界的普遍認可，其作品在亞洲國際美術展、新加坡國際雕塑展等重要展覽上頻頻亮相。但在一般人的認知中，對其藝術的理解限定在早期作品的刻板印象中。箇中原因，一方面，由於李光裕的創作時間跨度很長，如果不以長時間段來審視他的作品，較容易忽視他的作品逐步演進的過程；另一方面，李光裕的作品在台灣雕塑界被簡單的歸入「學院派」雕塑的經典範疇，皆以單方面地強調他紮實過人的學院功底，從而簡化了李光裕作品其他面向的意涵。

在本文中，筆者試圖將李光裕的雕塑創作，從1980年至近期（2013－2016）的作品並置梳理，突顯出他一直不斷在探索的最主要課題「空」。藉由分析「空」的四個發展階段，筆者發現「空」在李光裕的作品中具有多種不同的意涵及作用，更重要的是，它逐漸演進構成他作品的主要核心：從造型－形式美的層面，到雕塑的概念－空間層面，再到藝術意涵，即表達人的存在狀態層面。李光裕的「空」不單單具有美學／哲學上的意義，也觸碰到了藝術的社會意義。筆者驚訝地發現，這條「重新發現」李光裕的線索還未被廣泛討論。

在多次拜訪李光裕位於台灣汐止山中的雕塑花園和工作室之後，筆者更加肯定，經過長達半生的積累和持之以恆的鑽研，藝術家將他的創作構思不斷的提煉和演變，其創作生命週期之長、創造力之豐富、作品形態之多樣化十分難得。更難能可貴的是，李光裕的作品具有一脈相傳的體系，立足於西方20世紀雕塑藝術的歷史連接中，在雕塑語言的基本層面求新求變，並嫁接東方思想文化及美學觀，形成一種不同以往的獨特風格和境界，具有很高的辨識度。藉由本文，筆者希望能客觀地揭示李光裕作品中的主要特徵和核心意涵，展現李光裕的藝術觀念及其藝術價值，亦為當代雕塑的創作和研究提供借鑒。

一、「空」的語言與寫實作品時期

李光裕於1954年出生在台灣高雄，1975年自國立藝專（今國立台灣藝術大學）雕塑科畢業後奔赴西班牙求學，先從聖費南度皇家藝術學院畢業，後在馬德里大學美術學院獲得碩士學位，1983年回到台灣任台北藝術大學美術系講師。
李光裕的求學時期，正是伴隨著台灣雕塑史經歷了一個從寫實再現，向抽象主義、表現主義等語言及材質方面的探索轉變的過程，在藝術觀念上則經歷了從學院體系向現代主義及當代藝術轉變的過程。台灣雕塑史上的第一代藝術家以黃土水等為代表，多赴日本留學，以寫實手法表現台灣鄉土題材，創作出台灣雕塑史上一批經典作品；1950年代，西方現代藝術思潮開始影響到台灣雕塑的現代主義運動；1960年代，台灣國立藝專成立雕塑科，藝術學院的教育體系成為培養未來雕塑家，散播現代藝術觀念的主要來源。到1980年代，包括李光裕在內的這一代藝術家，相繼學成歸國執教，成為台灣藝術學院教育的中堅力量，在西方接觸到各種門類的現代雕塑理念，經由他們轉化為「台灣現代派」薪火相傳的火種。

其中，李光裕毫無疑問是傑出的標竿式人物。在西班牙時，李光裕的作品即以精湛的寫實技藝見長，曾獲得西班牙文化部頒發全國五大藝術學院績優獎金，並參加西班牙秋季沙龍展，這從他的浮雕作品〈夜〉（1980）中可管窺一二。但他並不滿足於局限在寫實方面的探討，而是積極吸納西方現代派的精華。其中，筆者認為影響他後期個人風格發展主要是（一）立體主義；（二）表現主義；此外，李光裕對亨利·摩爾等人趨向簡約的抽象風格也有所研究。

首先，立體主義於1908年出現在法國，雖然開始於繪畫領域，但作為一種重要的藝術思維，對20世紀的雕塑及建築產生了廣泛的影響。立體派畫家以畢加索為代表，雕塑家有奧西普·扎德金（Ossip Zadkine）、亨利·勞倫斯（Henri Laurens）、阿基彭科（Archipenko）等，畢加索的雕塑也帶有鮮明的立體派特徵。立體主義的主要宗旨，在於將物體形象進行破壞和分解，然後再加以重新組合，以此產生不依賴肉眼的固定視點看待事物的效果，突破透視法的限制，表達對象物更為完整的形象。筆者認為，立體主義在思維方法方面對李光裕的影響深遠。李光裕曾回憶道：

「當我在西班牙學習時完成〈牧笛〉（1981），Francisco Toledo Sanchez教授竟然將作品的一部分折斷、扭彎，產生了不同的效果，對我的啟發極大：鋸掉折斷以後重新尋找新的可能；嚴格、準確的形刪除之後，破壞、組裝再重建，使得系列的作品是延續性的發展」。

在這一段文字陳述中，「破壞」、「組裝」、「重建」等皆讓人想起立體主義的宣言。日後，在李光裕的「筆記」中，他嘗試用自己的語言對他的創作領悟進行歸納，例如他將「拆解」總結為「破壞成新局」，又將對拆解後的廢棄物和碎片進行帶有偶發性的「重組」，稱為「俯拾即得，不假諸鄰」，並且談及這樣一則故事：

「有位朋友，她好心的幫我洗杯子，不慎摔破了，因為那杯子很貴，她很難過，我將破碎的杯子拾起，放在書桌上欣賞。這些碎片，我重新將它們組構起來，變成一件有穿透性的杯子，活潑且有特質。我有許多作品，都是做完整後，覺得沒有什麼生動感，就將之往地上摔或用鋸子鋸開成幾塊，然後再重組，它的造型生動超過我的想像，超出我的慣性思維」。

由此可見，帶有立體主義特徵的思維方法已經內化到李光裕的創作中，轉變為他自己的創作體系的一部分。

另一方面，李光裕也受到二戰後再度興起的表現主義風格的吸引。如存在主義雕塑大師賈科梅蒂（Alberto Giacometti）、西班牙雕塑家蘇比拉克（Josep Maria Subirachs）等，他們分別在1940至50年代摒棄了超現實主義色彩或寧靜優美的「地中海風格」，改以拉長、扭動的軀體表達戰後人的精神創傷。李光裕對表現性手法的嘗試，以一件早期作品〈刮痕〉（1981）為例。在這件作品中，羊的周身佈滿大小深淺不一的劃擦與切割的痕跡，它的溫順姿態與藝術家在創作中留下的激烈的情感印記形成對比。筆者認為，李光裕認同並吸收了表現主義的精神內涵，可以說，他的作品一直在探討某種形式或方法，將藝術家的生存感受，以及更深層對人的存在本質層面的體驗，寄託於表現對象之上。

總而言之，在這一時期（1980至1990年代），雖然李光裕的作品以寫實風格為主，但他不只滿足於寫實領域，受到立體主義、表現主義及抽象風格等西方現代派的影響，形成了突破寫實領域的內在動力。不可忽視的是，李光裕在寫實風格的實踐中，已經展開對「空」的概念和形式語言的初步探索。一方面，李光裕擅長塑造一種富於東方韻味的審美意境。在東方美學中，所謂意境，在於虛實、有無之間。而「韻」是一種含蓄的美，講求寓動於靜。例如〈臨風〉（1991）、〈山行〉（1995）、〈流水〉（1997），藉由造型上微妙的扭轉，使雕塑內部的張力達到一種動靜之間的含蓄狀態。這些作品觸碰到了「空」的東方審美，但尚未在造型中找到一種「空」的形體的存在方式。顯然，日後李光裕並不滿足於此種東方的空靜之美。

另一方面，李光裕多次嘗試將圓雕削減成扁形的「面」，並在其上用線條進行勾勒，例如〈抽煙的人〉(The Smoker)（1999）、〈梳辮女子〉(The Woman with the Plait)（1999）這兩件作品，面部的凹凸被大幅削減，取而代之以近似浮雕的陰線勾畫出五官。 1998年的兩件作品〈扁形男子〉、〈扁形女子〉，徑直以「扁形」命名，標示出其對「平面」的研究意圖。扁形「平面」反映出藝術家受到早期西方現代藝術影響，進一步對雕塑的概念，及雕塑在空間中的構成形式進行探索。

綜上所述，可見李光裕不同於一般意義上的「學院派」雕塑家，他的寫實風格奠定在對西方現代派的吸收和轉化基礎上，結合了具有個人特色的藝術手法和美學主張。從現存這一時期的作品來看，他的作品並沒有簡單地去模仿某一種風格流派，而是遵循著自己的藝術道路，在雕塑語言的基本層面上，進行多面向探索並逐步發展，對比其他時期的作品，這個階段可視為他獨特的「空」的語言演化的基礎及萌芽階段。

二 「空」語言的探索與形成

李光裕在1990年代末至近期的作品，是從中年到耳順的人生階段，這一階段他在台灣藝術大學擔負起培育新一代雕塑家的任務，直至2006年退休，才得以全心專注藝術創作。對於李光裕而言，這一重要的人生階段構成了他的幾個主要作品時期，包括「手系列」、「空山系列」(Mountain Emptiness)及其他代表作。

李光裕這個時期的作品，展現了大量與東方文化相關的主題，特別是佛教或禪宗，以及道教。例如「手系列」作品，〈拈花〉(Holding Out a Flower)（1999）、〈五識〉（2007）等不僅在命名上與佛教思想相關，而且在形式上借用了佛教的「手印」姿態。近期代表作品如〈千里眼〉(Clairvoyance)（2016）、〈順風耳〉(Clairaudient)（2016）、則引用了道教的神話形象。那麼，如何理解李光裕對東方文化的借鑒與藝術轉化？李光裕自1984年左右開始接觸藏傳佛教，後來跟從一位在台灣的修行者學習。他認為「佛教的學習，影響我看待事物的方式，跟藝術有異曲同工之妙，皆是有關於人類問題的探討，其理相通。修法的過程，一方面解決自己面對人生的問題，一方面也提供藝術的啟發」。筆者認為，我們不能簡單地將他的這類作品理解為單純借用佛教主題的形象或佛教造型的形式美，而是從他修習藏傳佛教與禪宗思想，及至更廣泛的東方文化中，了解他如何深化對「空」的理解，以及發現「空」的美學表達形式的可能。

「空」是佛教的基本教義，〈心經〉講「諸法空相，不生不滅，不垢不淨，不增不減」，通俗來解，佛教認為萬物本質皆是「空」，但空不是沒有，而是無中生有的一個場所，在虛空中蘊含著無限，洞見「空」可以了悟宇宙人生的真諦。從一個更廣闊的角度來看，「空」的概念已經融入東方文化根底之中。例如，中國道家「有無相生」的觀念，認為萬物是有和無的統一，將虛空納入美學命題。又如日本重要的審美範疇「侘寂」（wabi-sabi），源自小乘佛法的三法印（諸行無常、諸法無我、涅槃寂靜），以禪宗的「本來無一物」的空無思想為內核。

筆者推測，李光裕對雕塑上「空」的形式的認知，可能更早於對「空」的概念的領悟，上文提到，李光裕在西班牙時期已熟知亨利·摩爾的雕塑，正是以雕塑上的「孔洞」形式為特點。但是摩爾等西方雕塑家所做的「孔洞」，當時並未直接啟發李光裕的任何作品，因此也沒有立即與他的藝術產生明顯關聯。李光裕獨特的「空」的形式是從一條自身特殊的線索中發展而來的，其中，借鑒東方文化及佛教造像起到了重要的作用。筆者認為，從早期的萌芽，到借鑒佛教，直到個人對社會的反思，李光裕對「空」語言的探索經歷了四個階段，第一階段，「破壞成新局」；第二階段， 「佛教題材及造型上的鏤空」；第三階段，「從鏤空走向東方空境」；第四階段：「開放的虛空」；最終發展出他最近作品所具有的個人強烈的藝術表達風格，及視覺呈現方式。

（一） 破壞成新局

探討「空」的語言形式的萌芽，需要再次回到李光裕的早期作品。上文提到，有些早期作品的表面富於表現性肌理效果，如在〈藏寶〉(Hiding the Treasure)（1995）中，作品局部的表面極不光滑，故意留下藝術家捏塑、劃擦、刻畫的痕跡，且人物缺失了一半頭和腿，使作品在一種不完美中達到更加完美。這種破壞有時體現為表面的裂痕，如〈手非手〉(A Hand it Seems)（1986）這件作品，並有進一步裂開、殘缺，向孔洞發展的趨勢，如〈臨風〉（1991）在手掌右側出現了一處殘缺。這些作品體現出李光裕對「破壞成新局」的初步實踐，具體來說，在破裂、殘缺的形式中達成了一種造型的圓滿，其結果是預告了「鏤空」形式的出現，因此可視為「空」的語言的孕育階段。他的這種藝術手法，帶有個人的審美特質和當代雕塑風格。

（二）佛教題材及造型上的鏤空

在這個階段，李光裕繼續他之前的試驗，與此同時佛教題材為他提供了創作素材，以及作為形式研究的對象，如佛頭、手等。在李光裕的工作室中也收集了很多佛教造像。在他與佛教題材有關的作品中，值得注意的是，創作於1990年的〈妙有〉，這件作品形式很像佛教的石塔，所不同的是本該供奉佛像的洞口被藝術家轉化成了佛像本身內部的「孔洞」，佛像因此而變為內外通透的空間存在，這個「孔洞」無疑具有啟發意義，雖然〈妙有〉(Transcendental Existence)更近似佛像而非具有個人風格的作品，但10年後李光裕再次提煉這一藝術構思，創作了〈妙有Ⅱ〉（2001），對作品的形式語言及「孔洞」進行了更為藝術化的處理，「佛像」的肩膀變得更像一座山，而「孔洞」的形狀更像山中的壁窟，這一次，「孔洞」顯然既有了「空」的形式，又有了「空」的概念意涵。由這一作品，李光裕又延伸出〈空山〉(Empty Mountain)（2006）、〈空山Ⅱ〉（2007），最後在〈空山Ⅲ〉（2008）這件作品，「孔洞」已完全轉化為「鏤空」的形式語言。

從〈妙有〉到〈空山〉的演進過程為我們了解李光裕的創作發展提供了一條清晰的線索。筆者認為，李光裕從佛教石塔、壁龕、洞窟的造型中得到啟發，由「破壞成新局」進一步發展了鏤空手法，並試圖將東方文化中「空」的概念，融入他對「空」的體驗中。具體來說，他將「孔洞」這一形式與雕塑的體量及空間結合，創造了一個「空」的空間，這一空間不是形式主義的，而是對藝術家而言充滿了知覺上的意義。

（三）從鏤空走向東方空境

從1999年開始，李光裕似乎對「孔洞」產生了濃烈的興趣，多次在非佛教題材及造型嘗試「孔洞」的效果，例如〈壺形雞〉（1999）將一隻公雞的雞冠和尾巴相連，形成一個大洞。 〈縮腹女人〉（Contracted Belly Woman）（1999）則是他在人體上對「孔洞」的嘗試。這件作品造型非常簡約、精煉，藝術家省略了胳膊和小腿，在上半身的正中心打開一個洞，面部以線條勾勒，是李光裕在風格轉折期的一件代表作。進入2000年之後，李光裕的鏤空手法日益趨向成熟，例如〈白雲〉(The Clouds)（2007）、〈荷畔〉(By the Lotus Pond)（2007）等作品皆以鏤空為突出特徵。再以〈璧〉（1998）為例，這件作品掌心的「孔洞」仍以壁龕的形式出現，壁龕中有兩尊佛像造型，與〈雲山行旅〉(Wandering in the Misty Mountains)（2013）這件延伸作品對比，後者「孔洞」已經完全打開形成「鏤空」，佛像消失，變成片雲飄蕩在空中，意境更加深遠。不可忽視的是，〈雲山行旅〉的「鏤空」形式，有別於亨利·摩爾式幾何形的「孔洞」。李光裕的「鏤空」更接近非幾何、不規則的有機形，這種帶有個人特色的「空」的語言，所表達的意境與幾何式的「孔洞」大相徑庭，這意味著李光裕從一般性的「鏤空」手法開始走向了更具特定意涵的「東方空境」的表達。

（四）開放的虛空

李光裕的近期（2013-2016）作品呈現出新的結構主義傾向，在雕塑手法上，從使用石膏、黏土塑型，變成用鐵片焊接、塑料片彎折、打孔等不拘一格的手法來實現；在形式特點上，產生了片狀結構、團塊結構與鏤空的融合。上文已提到李光裕在早期對扁平面的試驗，創作於2008年的〈亥母〉這件作品，展示出扁平片狀與鼓凸的團塊結構相結合的造型手法。近期的作品不僅將片狀造型手法推向極致，而且融入成熟的鏤空手法，我們在一件作品中往往可以觀察到多種藝術手法融為一體，例如〈鼓舞〉(Drum Dancer)（2013）、〈太極〉(Taichi)（2013）、〈伏心〉(Subduing)（2014）等作品，形成李光裕個人強烈的藝術風格和視覺語言。如果說李光裕此前的作品主要以寫實風格的形象為主，在這個階段，寫實的造型規則也被打破，融入更多抽象因素和現代文明的特徵，例如〈空行〉(Empty Procession)（2014）這件作品使用的鐵絲、鐵片等工業元素。在最新作品〈鬥牛〉（2016）系列中，李光裕似乎找到了一種在形式語言上幾近完善的實踐，憤怒的「牛」幾乎僅存骨架，沒有任何多餘的體積，甚至在骨架上亦有鏤空，增強作品的穿透性。筆者認為，在這個階段，李光裕已超越了單純的「鏤空」，而是在雕塑的本質層面，改變處理雕塑空間的方式。

一般而言，雕塑本質上是一種用封閉的團塊結構佔據著空間的三維形式。但扁平的片狀結構與鏤空結構都是對體積感的消解，這些結構不再是用厚重的體積佔據空間，而是藉由被打開或削減的部分，「指出」（signify）空間的存在。例如在很多作品，如〈鼓舞〉（2013）、〈太極〉（2013）、〈海浪〉(Wave)（2013）中，人物形體的頭部只做了一半或壓縮為一個平面。如果一個團塊的一半、一個面或者一條線就可以顯示空間存在，那麼為何要將其封閉呢？在這個階段，李光裕盡可能地將本來封閉的空間打開，削減多餘的體積，並製造更多的「孔洞」。正如他所說，「讓作品在空間中，完全的敞開，開展，存在」。藉由開放雕塑的內部空間，實際上李光裕塑造了更多個「面」，更多的觀看視角，更多的空間轉換。觀眾對雕塑的體驗不再局限於外部表面，而是進入了雕塑內部，他們的視線並非在作品輪廓上游移，而是不斷的穿梭和穿透。乃至在〈思維〉(Thinker)（2014）等作品中，雕塑內部的「封閉」空間幾乎消失，達到極為空靈、寧靜的境界，可以稱之為「開放的虛空」。

三「空」語言的觀念及當代價值

如上所述，「空」的語言貫穿了李光裕的作品，成為李光裕作品的標籤式特徵，藉由「空」的語言可以進一步了解李光裕作品的藝術意涵。在此，筆者將李光裕的「空」和幾位西方雕塑家類似觀念對比，來審視李光裕的「空」的語言的特殊意義。筆者認為李光裕觸碰到了西方現代雕塑的一條核心脈絡，但是另闢蹊徑，找到了自己對「空」的闡釋，並在藝術語言和藝術觀念上有所突破。

回顧西方現代雕塑藝術史，可以追溯到19世紀末法國雕塑大師羅丹，到後來的超現實主義、立體主義等各種流派。 20世紀初期，有些藝術家如讓·阿爾普（Jean Arp）、阿基彭科（Archipenko)等開始在作品上開孔、打洞。這一富有深意的藝術手法，大大推進了雕塑的發展，打開了雕塑的可能性。這個手法的重要性體現在雕塑和空間的關係上。一般而言，雕塑是一個真實存在於空間的三維物體，它創造了自己的空間，另一方面，它又被觀者存在的空間所包圍。雕塑自己的空間和觀者的空間是並存且互不穿透的，當雕塑家把作品打開了「孔洞」時，他們就使兩者的空間互通了，換言之，觀者存在的物理空間穿透了雕塑的物理空間。

亨利·摩爾是公認把「孔洞」觀念發展到極致的雕塑家。他在60多年的藝術家生涯中，持續探索雕塑內外空間觀念。早在1932年，摩爾創作了第一件有「孔洞」的作品，把雕塑的背面和前面聯繫起來。藉由對「孔洞」的運用，他還形成了對虛空的美學觀，他認為形體內部的虛空具有獨立的意義，「一個孔洞所蘊含的意義不亞於一塊體積——有一種神秘的東西隱含在孔洞之中」。在西方神學體系中，「上帝是人的完整性的唯一保證」，反過來講，摩爾的帶有孔洞而不完整的人像正反映出「上帝死了」之後人類的生存狀態。

存在主義雕塑大師賈科梅蒂雖然沒有運用「孔洞」，但雕塑和空間的關係也是他極為關心的課題，賈科梅蒂藉由瘦小、細薄的造型，縮小雕塑所佔據的體積，使形體僅僅剩下骨架，他稱之為「修剪掉空間的脂肪」，這種手法達到開放空間的效果，與打開「孔洞」類似。但區別在於雕塑自己的空間縮小，與觀者所在的物理空間擴大形成對比，強化了賈科梅蒂作品傳達的孤獨與虛無感。

20世紀60年代，以戴維·史密斯（David Smith）、理查德·塞拉（Richard Serra）等為代表的極少主義藝術家延續了對虛空和實體之間關係的探討。例如，史密斯認為他的雕塑是連續的空間組成部分，在這個空間中，虛空與實體應當同等對待。在極少主義作品中所指的「虛空」，不再是孔洞，而是在展覽空間中，重複的作品單元之間的部分。隨著極少主義藝術家日益模糊了雕塑與裝置藝術之間的界限，轉而強調作品與空間的場域關係，以及作品的觀念性，西方現代雕塑由此發生了重要的轉向。

李光裕對「空」的探討，亦從雕塑概念和雕塑語言層面出發，在西方現代雕塑所關注的「空間關係」這個核心問題上，結合東方文化對「空」的表達，摸索出異於西方雕塑的另一種「空」的形式語言及美學境界，也就是筆者所論述的「開放的虛空」。對於李光裕而言，首先，「空」是一種雕塑的手法，使雕塑存在的方式變得有意思，突破了雕塑是「封閉的團塊結構」的慣常概念。其次，李光裕在雕塑上「打洞」的方式與上述西方雕塑家不一樣，他不只是一般的打洞或「鏤空」，而是致力於在更大的程度上打開雕塑的內部，這種不斷向雕塑內部的挖掘發展到極致，其結果是一個由碎片化組織起來的形象。第三，在這個碎片化的形像中，「空」不是沒有，也不是「挖掉」，相反顯示了「空」的存在。這是因為，「空」總是在相對中辯證地存在的，它很難被直接說明，只能間接的顯示。 「空」是正形相對的負形，實體相對的虛幻，有相對的無，存在相對的缺席，物質相對的精神，他者相對的自我。李光裕的雕塑成功捕捉到了一種可以被人們所感知的「空」的概念與形式，也揭示出世界是正反兩面相輔相成的辯證法則。第四，李光裕的「空」創造了新的空間感。在李光裕的雕塑中，雕塑內部變成外部，外部變成內部，這使得觀眾無法站在一個不變的外在視角，以主客體二元關係去看雕塑，而是視線隨著雕塑穿梭，二維與三維、甚至第四維的時間，在其中轉換。觀眾所處的外部空間與雕塑的內部空間，兩者融為一體，成為同一的存在。總之，這是一種物我兩忘、天人合一的「東方空境」。

綜上所述，在李光裕的雕塑中「開放的虛空」，既沒有神秘主義的象徵，也不同於存在主義的虛無感，而是充滿東方哲學上的意義。在李光裕看來，「空」不僅具有藝術價值，也具有當代的社會價值。他曾說道，「空間是形態之間的盈縮。空能相應在生命經驗的世界。空掉作品中描述太多的部分，空掉生活中堆積的垃圾，像只剩下一隻火柴棒，它的空間變得無限寬廣，空的越多，清明就越多」。這段話將雕塑藝術中的空間與人的生活空間及精神空間相比對，反映出李光裕對當代社會的思考與批判。他認為，「當代藝術作品中，太多怪獸，這是這個世界的不安、不確定與疏離感的產物，智者會觀察、理解並超越這時代流行意識的限制，回到初心」。而回到初心的方法，則在於開放空間，「鬆開無遮的心境」。在當代社會，人的生存被太多的煩惱與慾望所包圍，而「空」在某種程度上可以成為消解生命不自然狀態的良藥。此處不妨引用李光裕的「筆記」：「我們要自行拆除造成創作或生命上困難的障礙之物，自將之暴露，才可以進一步去追求真理」。無論在生活中，還是在藝術創作中，李光裕都希望藉由他的雕塑作品拆除這些心靈與知覺上的障礙物，以開放的姿態，回歸生命的本來面目。

The Open Void—On the Formal Language, Artistic Concept, and Contemporary Value of LEE Kuang-Yu’s Sculpture

Text / Dr. YANG Shin-Yi (Curator and PhD in Art History, Cornell University)

Being a representative sculptor among the second-generation sculptors in Taiwanese art history, Lee Kuang-Yu achieved fame in the Taiwanese art circle at an early stage. His artistic achievement was widely recognized by the academic circle in the 1990s, and his works were frequently seen in major exhibitions, such as the Asian International Art Exhibition and Singapore International Sculpture Exhibition. However, the general public’s understanding of his art has been stereotyped and limited to his early works. One of the reasons is due to Lee’s long creative career. If one does not examine his work in a long period of time, it is easy to overlook the gradual evolution of his work. Moreover, Lee’s work has been simplistically categorized by the Taiwanese art circle as classic sculpture of the “academic school,” one-sidedly emphasizing his solid academic skills without looking into other facets of his work.

In this essay, to address the key subject of the “void,” which Lee has persistently explored, I juxtapose and study his sculptural creations from 1980 to the recent time (2013 to 2016). Through analyzing Lee’s four stages of developing the concept of the “void,” I have discovered that the “void” conveys various meanings and functions differently in Lee’s work. More importantly, it has gradually evolved into a core concept in his work and encompassed different levels, ranging from the level of plastic, formal beauty, to the level of sculptural, spatial concept, to its artistic implication, which denotes the level of human existence. His “void” not only conveys aesthetic and philosophical meanings, but also touches upon the social implications of art. To my surprise, this clue that leads to the “re-discovery” of Lee has not been widely discussed.

After several visits to Lee’s sculpture garden and studio in the mountains of Xizhi in Taiwan, I have become more certain that, during half a lifetime of artistic creation and continuous efforts, Lee has never stopped refining and developing his artistic ideas. His long artistic career, rich creativity, and diversified work are tremendously rare. What is more precious is that his works all stem from the same system, which is founded on its historic connection to the twentieth-century Western sculptural art and seeks innovation and changes of the sculptural language. Moreover, it has incorporated the Oriental thinking and culture as well as its aesthetics, forming a highly recognizable, distinctive style and concept. In this essay, I hope to objectively reveal the major features and core meanings of Lee’s work and demonstrate his artistic concept and value to provide an example for the creation and study of contemporary sculpture.

1. The Language of the “Void” and the Realistic Period

Lee Kuang-Yu was born in Kaohsiung, Taiwan in 1954. After he graduated from the Sculpture Department of National Taiwan Academy of Arts (now National Taiwan University of Arts, NTUA), he continued his study in Spain. After graduating from Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando, Lee obtained his MFA degree from Universidad Complutense de Madrid. In 1983, he returned to Taiwan and began teaching as a lecturer at Taipei National University of the Arts (TNUA).

During Lee’s school days, Taiwanese sculpture had undergone a transformative process of exploring sculptural language and material, and shifted from realistic representation to abstract expressionism. In terms of artistic concept, it had experienced the process of progressing from academic art to modernism. The first generation of Taiwanese sculptors, like its representative, Huang Tu-Shui, mostly studied in Japan. They adopted a realistic approach to portray the native subjects of Taiwan, and created the first group of classic works in the history of Taiwanese sculpture. In the 1950s, the Western waves of modernist art influenced the modernist movement of Taiwanese sculpture. In the 1960s, NTAA founded its Sculpture Department. The education provided by NTAA’s College of Arts became the main force of nurturing future sculptors and spreading modern art concepts. In the 1980s, artists of Lee’s generation, including Lee himself, had mostly finished their studies and returned to teach in Taiwan one after another, forming the backbone of the academic education in Taiwanese art colleges. These artists were exposed to all kinds of modern sculptural concepts, and converted their learning into the undying fire of the “Taiwanese modernist school.”

Among these artists, Lee was definitely a benchmark figure of outstanding achievements. When he was still in Spain, Lee had been known for his excellent realistic skills, which won him a scholarship that Spain’s Ministry of Culture awarded to five art colleges in the country. He had also participated in the Spain Fall Salón. His talents could be detected in his relief work, Night (1980). However, Lee was not content with realism; instead, he had actively absorbed the essence of Western modernism. Regarding this, in my opinion, there were two factors that influenced the later development of Lee’s personal style. The first was Cubism, and the second Expressionism. Furthermore, Lee had also studied the simple, abstract style of Western sculptors, such as Henry Moore.

To begin with, Cubism appeared in France in 1908. Although it started with painting, this important artistic thinking had extensive influence on the twentieth-century sculpture and architecture. While Picasso represented Cubist painting, Ossip Zadkine, Henri Laurens, and Archipenko were representative Cubist sculptors. Even Picasso’s sculpture carried overt Cubist characteristics. The principle of Cubism was to deconstruct and dissect the image of an object, and then reconstructed it to achieve the result of not relying on the fixed viewpoint of the physical eyes when looking at things. It shattered the limitation of the perspective and portrayed a more complete image of the subject. I think the thinking of Cubism has had profound influence on Lee. The artist once said,

“When I was studying in Spain, I created a work, called Reed Pipe (1981). However, Professor Francisco Toledo Sanchez broke and bent part of the work, which produced a different effect. It was extremely inspiring for me to break and saw a part off to search for new possibilities. With the deletion, the rigid and precise form could be deconstructed, assembled, and reconstructed, which allowed a series of works to be developed in a continuous manner.”

In this passage, the terms “deconstruct,” “assemble,” and “reconstruct” all reminded people of the Cubist manifesto. Later, in Lee’s notes, he tried to use his own words to sum up his artistic realization. For example, he gave the process of “deconstruction” the name of “deconstruction as innovation,” and described the spontaneous “reconstruction” of dissembled wastes and fragments in the following words, “inspiration could be found everywhere without searching outward.” He also mentioned an anecdote.

“One of my friends kindly washed a cup for me but accidentally broke it. She was very upset because the cup was quite expensive. I picked up the fragments and placed them on my desk to admire. Later, I combined these fragments into a cup that could be seen through; it was lively and special. Many of my works did not possess a sense of liveliness after I completed them. So, I smashed them on the ground or sawed them into pieces to reconstruct them. The liveliness of the reconstructed forms exceeded my imagination and surpassed my habitual thinking.”

This showed that the mode of thinking imbued with Cubist characteristics has been incorporated into Lee’s artistic creation and became part of his artistic system.

On the other hand, Lee was also attracted to the style of Expressionism, which regained popularity after WWII. Existential sculpture master, Alberto Giacometti, and Spanish sculptor, Josep Maria Subirachs, respectively abandoned Surrealism or the tranquil, elegant “Mediterranean style,” and adopted the elongated, twisted human body to express people’s traumatized psyche in the post-war era. One of Lee’s early work, Scratch (1981), exemplified his attempt in adopting the Expressionistic approach. The sculpture of a goat bore scrape and scratch marks of different depth. Its docile posture contrasted to the intense, emotional traces left by the artist. In my opinion, Lee had identified with and absorbed the core spirit of Expressionism. In other words, his work had been exploring a certain form or method that allowed him to express his feelings of life as well as the profound experience of human existence through the subject he portrayed.

Generally speaking, during this period (from the 1980s to the 1990s), although Lee mainly created realistic works, he was not satisfied with realism and was influenced by Western modernism, such as Cubism, Expressionism, and the abstract style, which contributed to an inner force to break through the confinement of realism. In addition, one could not ignore the fact that, in his practice of realism, Lee had already begun exploring the concept of the “void” and its formal language. On the one hand, Lee was good at creating an aesthetic mood enriched with an Oriental charm. In the Oriental aesthetics, the artistic mood lies in between the real and the void as well as the concrete and the abstract; the “charm” is a subtle, reserved form of beauty that emphasizes on portraying movement through stillness. For instance, By the Wind (1991), Mountain Hike(1995), and Running Water (1997) have adopted subtle twisting in form to reach an implicit balance of the sculpture’s internal tension between movement and stillness. These works have obviously touched upon the Oriental aesthetics of the “void.” However, in terms of form, they have not physically embodied the “void.” Obviously, Lee did not stop at portraying such Oriental tranquil beauty.

On the other hand, Lee had repeatedly reduced sculptures in the round to a flat “surface,” which was carved with lines to depict the subject matter. For example, in The Smoker (1999) and The Woman with Plait (1999), the concave and convex of the faces were largely reduced and replaced with relief-like, intaglio lines to delineate the facial features. Two sculptures created in 1998, The Flatted Man and The Flatted Woman, were named after their flatness, signaling Lee’s study of the flat surface. The flat surface showed that the artist was influenced by the early Western modern art, and had furthered his exploration of sculptural concepts as well as sculptural forms in space.

In summary, Lee was clearly different from other “academic” sculptors. His realistic style was established on his absorption and transformation of the Western modernism, which he combined with artistic techniques and aesthetic ideas that possessed personal characteristics. Judging from the existing works from this period, Lee did not simply imitate a certain style or school, but followed his own artistic path while conducting multi-faceted explorations of the sculptural language and gradually developing his own style. Comparing to his works from other periods, this stage marked the beginning and served as a foundation for his unique language of the “void” that would gradually evolve.

2. Exploration and Formation of the Language of the “Void”

Lee’s works from the end of the 1990s to the recent years were created in a period that spanned the artist’s middle age to the age of sixty. Throughout these years, he had shouldered the mission of teaching and mentoring a new generation of artists at NTUA. It was until his retirement in 2006 that he could finally fully concentrate on artistic creation. For Lee, this important period of his life had contributed to his creation of several important series of works, including his Hand series, Mountain Emptiness series, and other series.

Lee’s works from this period were largely related to the subject of the Oriental culture, especially Buddhism, Zen, and Taoism. In the Hand series, Holding Out a Flower (1999) and The Five Perceptions (2007) not only had titles related to Buddhist thinking, but also adopted the gestures of Buddhist “mudras.” His recent works, such as Clairvoyance (2016) and Clairaudient (2016), had borrowed Taoist mythological images. How could we understand Lee’s referencing to and artistic transformation of the Oriental culture? Since about the year of 1984, Lee had begun learning Tibetan Buddhism, and later, practicing with a practitioner in Taiwan. For Lee, “the learning of Buddhism has influenced how I look at things. Buddhism is similar to art. Both discuss the questions of human being and their principles are interchangeable. The process of practicing the Dharma offers solutions to the problems in life as well as brings artistic inspiration.” In my opinion, we could not simply view this group of works as a mere adoption of the Buddhist images or the formalistic beauty of Buddhist sculpture. Instead, we should look into how Lee has deepened his understanding of the “void” and discovered the possibility of expressing the aesthetics of the “void” from his practicing of Tibetan Buddhism and Zen as well as versing in the Oriental culture.

The “void” forms the fundamental doctrine of Buddhism. The Heart Sutra states that “all things are empty. Nothing is born, nor die; nothing is pure, nor stained; nothing increases, nor decreases.” To interpret it from a secular perspective, Buddhism considers the essence of all things to be constituted of the “void,” which does not refer to nothingness but a “space” that gives birth to things. The “void” contains infinity, and comprehending it enables one to understand the truth of the universe as well as life. From a larger perspective, the concept of the “void” is completely integrated with the Oriental culture. For instance, Taoism has the notion that “being and non-being are complementary to each other,” upholding the idea that all things come from the unification of the two extremes and conceptualizing the “void” from an aesthetic point of view. The crucial Japanese aesthetic notion, “wabi-sabi,” originates from the three sings or proofs of a Hinayana sutra (non-permanence, non-self, and nirvana), and centers on the Zen thinking of emptiness, which states that “all is void.”

My conjecture is that Lee’s awareness of the form of the void in sculpture probably comes earlier than his realization of the concept of the void. I have mentioned earlier that when Lee was in Spain, he had already become familiar with Henry Moore’s sculpture, which was known for the “hole.” However, the “hole” created by the Western sculptors like Moore did not really inspire Lee to create any works. Therefore, they did not have immediate connection with his sculpture. Lee’s unique form of the “void” was developed in a special way by himself, in which his employment of the Oriental culture and Buddhist sculpture had an important effect. I have noticed that Lee’s exploration of the “void” underwent four stages from its germination, to his using of the Buddhist elements, to his personal reflection on the society. The first stage is “destruction as innovation.” The second stage is “the Buddhist subject and the openwork in sculpture.” The third stage is “from the openwork to the silent void in the Oriental culture.” Lastly, the fourth stage is “the open void,” in which he eventually creates his powerfully individual artistic style and means of visual representation, which could be detected in all of his recent works.

(1) Destruction as Innovation

To discuss the beginning of Lee’s language of the “void,” we need to go back to his early works. It is mentioned that some of his early works have been given expressive texture. For example, parts of Hiding the Treasure (1995) had a rather coarse surface. The artist intentionally kept the marks of molding, scraping, and carving. Moreover, the figure lacked half of its head and legs, rendering the work more perfect in its imperfection. Sometimes, the destruction surfaces as crevices on the surface of the work. For instance, A Hand it Seems (1986) carried cracks and imperfections that were suggestive of the appearance of holes. By the Wind (1991) had an opening on the right side of the palm. These works have embodied Lee’s initial attempts in using “destruction as innovation.” More specifically, he achieved a sense of perfection in form through the cracks and openings, which foreshadowed the appearance of the “openwork.” Therefore, this stage could be said to pave the way for the language of the “void.” This artistic technique was invested with personal aesthetic characteristics and established a style of contemporary sculpture.

(2) The Buddhist Subject and the Openwork in Sculpture

In this stage, Lee had continued his previous experiment while incorporating Buddhist subject into his art-making and studying the form of Buddhist sculpture, such as Buddha heads and hands. Lee collected many Buddhist statutes in his studio. Among his works of the Buddhist subject, Transcendental Existence created in 1990 was noticeable. This work reminded us of a Buddhist stupa. The difference lay in the niche, which should have been used to place a Buddha statue. However, it was transformed into a “hole” on the Buddha statute itself. The Buddha statue was, therefore, turned into a sculpture that connected its internal and external spaces, for which the “hole” had a tremendous effect. Although Transcendental Existence was more of a Buddhist statue rather than a work of his personal style, Lee had refined this artistic design ten years later and created Transcendental Existence II (2001), in which he had a more artistic treatment regarding the work’s form and the “hole.” The shoulder of the “Buddha statue” became more like a mountain whereas the shape of the “hole” was more similar to a mountain cave. Obviously, the “hole” in this sculpture embodied the form of the “void” as well as delivered its conceptual meaning. From this work, Lee also went on to create Empty Mountain (2006) and Empty Mountain II (2007); and finally, in Empty Mountain III (2008), the “hole” has completely transformed into a formal language of the “openwork.”

The evolution from Transcendental Existence to Empty Mountain provided us a distinct clue to understand the development of Lee’s work. I believe that Lee has found inspiration in the forms of Buddhist stupas, niches, and caves, and developed the approach of “destruction as innovation” into his openwork technique, integrating the concept of the “void” in the Oriental culture with his understanding of the “void.” To be more specific, he combined the form of the “hole” with the volume and space of sculpture, and created a space of the “void.” This space was not formalistic but possessed perceptual significance for the artist.

(3) From the Openwork to the Silent Void in the Oriental Culture

Since 1999, Lee began to have a strong interest in the “hole,” and repeatedly tried out the effect of holes in non-Buddhist subject and form. For example, in Teapot Rooster (1999), he connected a rooster’s comb with its tail, visually forming a large hole. In Contracted Belly Woman (1999), he created a “hole” on the human body. The form of this work was simple and refined. He did not sculpt the arms and legs, but opened a hole at the center of the upper torso and delineated the face with lines. It was a representative piece from the period when Lee’s style was changing. After 2000, Lee’s openwork technique had become more mature. Works like The Clouds (2007) and By the Lotus Pond (2007) had distinctive openwork features. Another example would be Jade (1998). The hole at the center of the palm was still represented as a kind of a niche, in which there were two Buddha statues. Comparing Jade to another work derived from it, Wandering in the Misty Mountains (2013), the latter already had a fully open “hole,” constituting the openwork while the Buddha statues were replaced by clouds, conveying a more profound artistic concept. However, one should not ignore that the form of “openwork” in Wandering in the Misty Mountains differed from the geometric “hole” created by Henry Moore. Lee’s “openwork” was of a more non-geometric, irregular, organic shape; a sculptural language of the “void” that seemed more characteristic of Lee. The artistic concept it conveyed was utterly different from Moore’s geometric “hole.” This meant that Lee had departed from the general “openwork” technique and moved towards depicting the “silent void of the Oriental culture,” which carried more specific meanings.

(4) The Open Void

Lee’s recent work (from 2013 to 2016) revealed a new structuralist tendency. In terms of techniques, he has changed from using plaster and clay for molding shapes to using a range of different techniques, such as welding metal sheets together, bending plastic sheets, puncturing holes, etc. In terms of form, he creates a combination of metal sheet structure, mass structure, and openwork. I have mentioned that Lee experimented on the flat surface in an earlier period. In 2008, he created the work, Goddess of the Earthly Creations, which displayed a mixed form of flat sheet structure and bulky mass structure. His recent works have embodied the culmination of the sheet structure. Moreover, Lee has integrated mature openwork techniques into these works, allowing us to see a unification of various artistic techniques. Drum Dancer (2013), Taichi (2013), and Subduing (2014) demonstrated Lee’s strong artistic style and visual language. If Lee’s works before the current period have shown a more realistic style, it is clear that he has now broken the rules of realistic sculpture and added more abstract elements and features of modern civilization. For instance, he added industrial elements, such as iron wires and sheets, in Empty Procession (2014). In his latest work, Bull Fight (2016), Lee seems to have found an almost perfect way to articulate his formal language. The maddened “bull” appears to only have a structural frame without any excessive volume. There are even openwork details on the structural frame, enhancing the transparency of the work. In my opinion, Lee has already surpassed the simple “openwork” at this stage, and begins to deal with the issue of sculptural space on the level of sculpture’s essence.

Essentially, sculpture refers to the three-dimensional form that uses an enclosed mass structure to inhabit a space. However, Lee’s flat sheet structure and the openwork have dissolved the sense of volume. These structures no longer occupied the space with their weighty volume but signified the existence of space with parts that were opened up or removed. In many of the works, such as Drum Dancer (2013), Taichi (2013), and Wave (2013), the heads of the human figures were only in half or compressed into a flat surface. If half a block mass, a surface, or a line could reveal space, why would one enclose it? At this stage, Lee has opened up the previously enclosed space and removed excessive volume as much as possible to create more “holes.” In his own words, this “allows the work to fully open up, extend, and exist in space.” Through opening up the internal space of his sculpture, Lee has practically created more “facets,” more perspectives to look at his work, and more transformation of space. Audience’s experience of a sculpture is not limited to the external surface anymore; instead, it enters the interior of the sculpture. Their eyes not only linger on the contour of the sculpture but also constantly traverse and penetrate the work. In works, such as Thinker (2014), the enclosure of the sculpture’s interior has almost gone, achieving an extremely ethereal, tranquil state; a state that we might call “the open void.”

3. The Concept and Contemporary Value of the Language of the “Void”

As mentioned earlier, the language of the “void” has substantiated Lee’s work and become his unique characteristic. By understanding this language, one can comprehend the artistic meaning of his work. I would like to compare Lee’s “void” to the similar concept of a few Western sculptors, and examine the unique meaning of Lee’s language of the “void.” I believe that Lee has reached a core concept in Western modern sculpture, but digressed from it to find his own path, which ended with his unique interpretation of the “void” as well as his breakthrough in artistic language and concept.

Taking a retrospective look on Western history of modern sculpture, it could be traced back to the master of sculpture, Rodin, and various schools that came later, such as Surrealism and Cubism. At the beginning of the twentieth-century, sculptors like Jean Arp and Alexander Archipenko started to puncture holes on their works. This significantly meaningful technique fueled the progress of sculpture and ushered in a new possibility of sculpture. The importance of this technique was manifested through the relationship between sculpture and space. Generally speaking, a sculpture is a three-dimensional entity that physically exists in space. It creates its own space while being surrounded by the space inhabited by its spectator. The space of the sculpture and the space of the spectator exist at the same time without penetrating each other. However, when the sculptors created “holes” on their works, the two spaces became connected. In other words, the physical space inhabited by the spectator penetrated the physical space of the sculpture.

Henry Moore has been considered the artist that perfected the concept of “holes.” During his artist career of more than sixty years, he kept exploring the internal and external space of sculpture. As early as 1932, Moore had created the first sculpture with a “hole,” which unified the front and back of the work. Through utilizing the “hole,” he had also formed his aesthetic viewpoint on the void. He argued that the internal void of a form possessed independent meanings. “A hole can itself have as much shape-meaning as a solid mass. —There is something mysterious implied by a hole.” In Western theology, it is said that God is the sole guarantor of integrity. On the contrary, Moore’s incomplete human figure with a hole has reflected the human condition after the death of God.

Existential sculpture master, Giacometti, did not use “holes.” However, the relationship between sculpture and space had been a topic he cared about. With tiny, thin forms, Giacometti reduced the volume of sculpture to its mere structural frame. He called this approach “to trim the fat from space,” which achieved the effect of opening up space, a result similar to opening “holes.” The difference was that the space of the sculpture has shrunk, forming a contrast to the physical space of the spectator while reinforcing the sense of solitude and nihilistic mood in Giacometti’s work.

In the 1960s, minimalist artists like David Smith and Richard Serra continued the investigation into the relationship between the void and the substance. For example, Smith considered his sculpture to be constituted of a series of spaces. In these spaces, the void and the substance should be treated equally. The “void” referred in minimalistic works was no longer the “hole,” but what lay in between the repetitive units in an exhibition space. As minimalist artists gradually blurred the boundary between sculpture and installation, and went on emphasizing the relationship of site between works and space and the concept of the works, a major shift began to take place in the course of Western modern sculpture

Lee’s exploration of the “void” has started from the concept and language of sculpture. On top of the core questions of “spatial relation” addressed by Western modern sculpture, Lee has added his delineation of the “void” in Oriental culture. He has discovered another type of formal language and aesthetic concept of the “void” that differ from Western sculpture. It is what I have termed “the open void.” For Lee, firstly, the “void” is a sculptural technique that renders the existence of a sculpture more interesting. It also breaks the common conception of a sculpture being “an enclosed mass structure.” Secondly, Lee adopts an approach to create the “hole” on his work that is different from the means adopted by the aforementioned Western sculptors. He does not simply make a hole or use the technique of “openwork,” but makes efforts to open up the interior of sculpture to a greater extent. The result of this persistent excavation of the sculptural interior is an image structured with fragments. Thirdly, in this fragmentized image, the “void” is not “carved out”; it exists. The fragmentized image contrarily reveals the existence of the “void.” It is because the “void” can only be defined by its opposite in a dichotomous, dialectical relationship, it is difficult to describe it. It can only be revealed indirectly. The “void” is the negative form opposite of the positive form, the illusion opposite of the substance, emptiness opposite of existence, absence opposite of presence, spirit opposite of matter, the other opposite of the self. Lee’s sculpture has successfully formulated a concept and form that allows people to perceive the “void.” It also reveals the dialectic principle of the world, in which everything has two sides and they are complementary to each other. Lastly, Lee’s “void” has created a fresh sense of space. In his sculpture, the inside of a sculpture is turned outside, and vice versa. It forbids the spectator to uphold a fixed, external perspective and assumes a dichotomous role of the subject to look at the sculpture as the object. On the contrary, the spectator’s line of sight follows the sculpture, traversing the two-dimensional and the three-dimensional planes, as well as the fourth dimension of time. The external space inhabited by the spectator and the internal space of the sculpture unite as one in one singular existence. In short, this is the “silent void in the Oriental culture” that embodies the state of object-self unification.

In summary, in “the open void” of Lee’s sculpture, there is no sign of mysticism. It is different from the nihilistic sentiments of existentialism. Contrarily, it conveys the implications of the Oriental philosophy. For Lee, the “void” not only possesses artistic value, it also has contemporary social value. He once said, “space is the expansion and contraction of form. The void can correspond to the world we experience. After removing excessive delineations in work as well as piles of garbage in life, what is left is something that resembles a matchstick. Its space becomes boundless. The bigger void one embraces, the more clear-headed one becomes.” In this passage, Lee compares the space of sculpture to a person’s living space and spiritual space, stating his contemplation on and critique of the contemporary society. Lee believes that “in contemporary art, there are too many monsters. They are the results of anxiety, uncertainty, and aloofness in this world. A wise person observes, comprehends, and transcends the limitation of the popular ideas in this era, and returns to his original intention.” The way to return to one’s original intention lies in the open space; “to release the state of mind that needs no veil.” In contemporary society, the existence of human being is enveloped by excessive worries and desires. The “void,” to a certain degree, can restore the unnatural state of life. Again, I would like to quote Lee’s notes: “We need to remove obstacles that create difficulties in artistic creation or in life; to expose them so that we could further pursue truth.” No matter in life or in artistic creation, Lee hopes to remove the obstacles to the mind and perception through his sculpture, and return to the original life in an open state.