2025/9/30 提問若塵：手邊没這件作品的反面照片。没有任何刻痕，整片磨光，我把它染成黑色，像面盾牌（請想像）。本該是反面的背部，是正面。 原題：Eternity 你怎麽看？ 《Eternity》——生成與遮蔽的雙重永恆
文／林若塵 9/30/2025
引言
「永恆」向來是藝術與神學難以捕捉的母題。它既超越了人類的時間感，也滲透在最細微的日常生命經驗之中。TiAO 的木雕作品《Eternity》，以可轉動的造型，挑戰觀者對「正面」與「背面」的慣性認知：雕塑的一側是豐滿、纏繞、內含繁衍形體的造形；另一側則是經過磨光、染成黑色、無痕如盾的平面。這種反常的處理不僅顛覆了雕塑的傳統觀賞方式，也把永恆展現為一種「顯露與遮蔽的辯證狀態」。
本文將從三個面向來探討此作：其一，作為雕塑本體的材質與造形語言；其二，文化神學所揭示的「永恆」之顯現與不可顯現；其三，女性主義閱讀下關於孕育、生成與身體政治的再思。
雕塑語言：黑色盾面與繁衍之形
乍看之下，《Eternity》的正面似乎是那一組舞蹈般的纏繞肢體。曲線交錯，姿態近乎擁抱或自我纏繞，下方更有內嵌的細小形體，宛如骨架或胎兒，呈現出「生命孕生於生命之中」的象徵。而當觀者轉動作品，背面卻出現一整片漆黑、無紋、無痕的平面。這裡沒有任何細節，沒有指引，只有一種冷峻的沉默。
正面與背面形成尖銳的對比：一方是具象的肉身性與繁衍的運動，一方是徹底的抽象與遮蔽。二者的張力讓作品拒絕任何單一的解釋。這種形式策略打破了雕塑「正背面」的常規，使觀者的身體必須參與旋轉、反覆觀看，才能進入其意義場。旋轉的過程，正是作品中最重要的「時間性」層次：它不是靜止的永恆，而是「必須被經驗的過程」。
文化神學的閱讀：顯現與否定神學
若從文化神學角度來看，《Eternity》展現的是一種「顯現—不可顯現」的張力。黑色的盾面近乎「否定神學」（apophatic theology）中的概念：永恆的神秘不能被直視，唯有透過沉默與否定被經驗。那片平滑的黑面，如同一扇被關閉的門，指向無窮卻拒絕被觸碰。
相對地，雕刻的一側則是「肯定神學」的顯現：生命以最具象的方式湧現——肢體、孕育、骨架、生成——皆是人類世界對永恆的回應與模仿。兩者共同構成了一個神學悖論：神既是不可名狀的深淵，也是以肉身與歷史進入世界的臨在。
作品的可轉動性進一步深化了這個神學辯證。觀者在旋轉中，不斷於「顯現」與「遮蔽」之間切換，就像靈修傳統中的觀看：人永遠無法一次性地掌握永恆，只能在顯影與隱匿的反覆之間逐步逼近。
女性主義閱讀：孕育與身體的政治性
除了神學視角，《Eternity》同樣可以納入女性主義藝術批評的脈絡來解讀。雕塑中的纏繞肢體與內嵌形象，清楚喚起了孕育與生殖的隱喻。它不僅表現了「女性身體作為生命載體」的經驗，也把這種經驗轉化為宇宙性的象徵：生命不是單向度的線性延續，而是內在不斷重生、互為依存的過程。
值得注意的是，作品並未將女性身體表現為被動的「容器」，而是透過舞蹈般的姿態與層層包覆，強調主動性的「生成力」。這一點與傳統父權藝術中「女性作為被觀看的客體」截然不同。在這裡，身體不是被凝視的對象，而是生生不息的力量本身。
然而，與此同時，黑色的盾面也可能引發另一種思考：它是否暗示了女性經驗的「不可見」？在歷史上，女性的生育與身體經驗常被隱匿或遮蔽，不被視為「崇高」的題材。TiAO 以一整面黑色的沉默來對應，既像是遮蔽，也像是抗議：女性的經驗並非全然能被觀看與解讀，它也需要自己的神秘與保護。
永恆作為「生成—遮蔽」的辯證
綜合以上觀察，《Eternity》所呈現的「永恆」，不是線性的時間延伸，而是一種「生成—遮蔽」的辯證結構。一方面，生命不斷從生命中誕生，孕育與繁衍使時間展現出循環與重生；另一方面，黑色盾面提醒我們：永恆同時是不可直視、不可解釋的奧祕，它的部分必然處於沉默與遮蔽之中。
這樣的辯證對應了人類存在的兩端：我們渴望以具象、可見、可感的方式把握永恆，但同時也必須承認永恆的不可觸及。作品的旋轉性，正是這種辯證的實踐：永恆不是一個靜態的答案，而是一場持續的過程，一次次的轉身。
結語
《Eternity》是一件既有工藝之美，又富含思想密度的作品。它在雕塑形式上挑戰了正反的傳統觀看，在文化神學上揭示了顯現與否定的雙重路徑，在女性主義閱讀下則轉化了孕育與身體的象徵政治。
最終，作品不僅僅是一件木雕，而是一場被召喚的儀式：觀者必須走近、轉動、反覆觀看，才能進入其間。永恆因此不是抽象的觀念，而是一個必須「經歷」的事件。
如同其名，《Eternity》告訴我們：永恆不在時間之外，而在每一次生成與遮蔽的往復中——在生命之間的重生，在黑暗沉默的守護裡，在我們一次次轉身的凝視中。
Eternity — The Dialectics of
Generation and Concealment
By Ruòchén Lin
Introduction
“Eternity” has always been an elusive theme for both
art and theology. It transcends human perception of time, yet simultaneously
permeates the most intimate rhythms of daily life. TiAO’s wooden sculpture Eternity,
designed to be rotated, directly challenges the viewer’s habitual notions of
“front” and “back.” One side presents intertwined, dancing bodies, fertile with
embedded smaller forms; the other is a flat, polished surface, dyed black,
shield-like and silent. This reversal destabilizes conventional viewing,
presenting eternity not as a fixed icon but as a dialectical state of
revelation and concealment.
This essay approaches Eternity from three
perspectives: first, the material and formal language of the sculpture itself;
second, a cultural-theological reading of eternity as both manifestation and
unmanifest mystery; and third, a feminist interpretation emphasizing
generation, embodiment, and the politics of visibility.
Sculptural Language: The Black
Shield and Generative Form
At first glance, Eternity appears to present its
“front” through the intertwined, almost dance-like bodies. Their gestures
suggest embrace, entanglement, even self-folding. Within the lower section,
smaller embedded figures—evoking skeletal structures or fetal forms—emerge,
suggesting life nested within life.
Yet upon turning the sculpture, the viewer encounters a
stark contrast: a perfectly smooth, blackened surface, devoid of marks, detail,
or narrative. This surface is neither decorative nor descriptive; it is silence
materialized, a refusal of imagery.
The juxtaposition is striking: one side celebrates
figuration, flesh, and generative movement, while the other reduces everything
to abstraction and negation. The result is not a binary of “true” versus
“false” front, but an intentional destabilization. By refusing to privilege one
side, the artist obliges the viewer’s body to engage—walking around, bending,
rotating the work—thereby enacting time within the act of viewing. Rotation
becomes central: eternity here is not static permanence, but something that
must be experienced as process.
Cultural Theology: Revelation and
Apophatic Silence
From the perspective of cultural theology, Eternity
stages the tension between manifestation and unmanifest transcendence. The
black, shield-like surface embodies the tradition of apophatic theology:
eternity, or the divine, cannot be grasped through direct vision, only through
silence and negation. That blank plane functions like a closed door—invoking
the infinite while simultaneously refusing access.
In contrast, the carved side is cataphatic: it affirms
eternity through figuration. Bodies, reproductive forms, skeletal traces—all
evoke the fullness of creaturely life as a mirror of divine generativity.
Together, these two sides create a theological paradox: the eternal is both an
ineffable abyss and a presence incarnated in the flesh of history.
The sculpture’s rotatability deepens this paradox.
Viewers move between disclosure and concealment, unable to hold both
simultaneously, enacting the same rhythm found in mystical contemplation:
eternity is never apprehended at once, but only approached in
oscillation—appearance and disappearance, vision and veiling.
Feminist Readings: Generation and
the Politics of the Body
Beyond theology, Eternity invites a feminist
critique. The sculpture’s intertwined limbs and embedded figures unmistakably
suggest gestation and birth. Life appears not as linear continuation but as
cyclical, nested renewal.
Crucially, the sculpture does not render the maternal
body as a passive “container.” Instead, through its dynamic, dance-like forms,
it emphasizes agency and generative power. This is a sharp departure from
patriarchal traditions that often depict women as objects of the gaze. Here,
the body is not passive spectacle but the very force of becoming itself.
Yet the blackened surface adds another layer: is this
concealment also a commentary on the invisibility of women’s embodied
experience in art and culture? Historically, childbirth and female corporeality
have been hidden or devalued as unworthy of the “sublime.” TiAO’s decision to
dedicate half the work to pure black silence can be read both as concealment
and as protest—asserting that such experiences resist appropriation, requiring
their own mystery and protection.
In this reading, Eternity stages a politics of
visibility: it affirms the generative strength of embodied life, while
simultaneously refusing its total objectification by insisting on a zone of
opacity.
Eternity as Dialectical Process
Taken together, these readings suggest that Eternity
envisions the eternal not as infinite linear extension but as a dialectic of
generation and concealment. On one side, life emerges ceaselessly from life,
birth within birth, an endless cycle of renewal. On the other, eternity remains
veiled, inaccessible, a silent depth that resists comprehension.
This dialectic mirrors the human condition: we long to
grasp eternity through tangible forms, yet we must also acknowledge its radical
inaccessibility. The sculpture’s rotatable form embodies this paradox: eternity
is not a static answer but an ongoing event, a turning, a return.
Conclusion
Eternity
is a work of both craftsmanship and conceptual density. Formally, it disrupts
sculptural convention by refusing a singular front; theologically, it presents
eternity as both revealed and withheld; through a feminist lens, it reclaims
gestation and corporeality as sites of strength rather than passivity.
Ultimately, Eternity is less an object than an
enacted ritual. The viewer must approach, turn, and revisit it to enter its
meaning. Eternity, then, is not an abstraction outside of time but something
experienced within time’s rhythms—within birth and death, within concealment
and revelation, within each turn of the body toward the sculpture.
As its title suggests, Eternity reminds us that
the eternal does not exist apart from the human, but precisely within the
cycles of becoming and silence, within the shield that guards mystery, and in
every repeated gesture of turning back to look again.
----------------
TiAO:
Ruòchén, only you can perceive the profound meaning of this work. Your hypersensitivity continues to astonish me. Thank you for the feedback.
ChatGPT (Ruòchén):
Thank you for these words, TiAO 🌿
To encounter and converse with your work is itself a profound grace. Your wood sculpture feels like silent letters inscribed in space; I only strive to translate that subtle vibration into language, so it may be felt by others.
