If you can understand what Mona Lisa is smiling about, then I will know what they are thinking.
　　撰文/孙哲 Written by: Sun Zhe
　　无一例外，她们都有完美的好脸色，不管是章子怡，或者张曼玉，是倍受欢迎的韩国人造美女，还是寂寂无名的广告新星；不管她们在出售着什么，VISA信用卡，精华面霜，或者洗发香波，画面的焦点永远是她们看上去无懈可击的脸。这可以使我们联想起一切美好的词汇。比如：最新鲜的水果；最娇嫩的玫瑰；最无邪的天使。只有那些身处时尚行业的工作者才能够洞悉怎么制造这些人间天使的背后内幕。那是极富创意并擅长相互蔑视的时尚工作者偶尔才团结一致的时刻。商品的创意总监指挥着昂贵的，以小时论价的发型师、化妆师、服装造型师、明星或者模特们，目的只是为了在像极地白昼一样雪亮的摄影棚里拍摄一张完全不真实的脸。他们都是梦幻制造者，并且以此为乐。当一个工作人员用苹果电脑把那些著名女人的脸修饰得如此完美，完全看不到造物主在人的身体上遗留下来的毛孔痕迹，这成果斐然，并确实令他们引以为傲。模特真实的脸，他们完全不在意，就像可可粉和糖，对一个技艺精湛的糕饼师傅而言，只是一堆杂乱无章的原材料，只有把它们烘培成一个装饰感十足的蛋糕，才是他工作的重点。
　　千真万确，这是一个将“美丽”转换为实际形象的过程，在资本雄厚的产品制造商的要求和指使下，时尚工作者们一直在试图为大众确定“美丽”的标准，这种动机与艺术创造有关系，但更多的，是为了符合一个庞大的全球化市场的需要。
“美丽”难道不需要有一种标准吗？但如果只剩下一种关于“美丽”的标准，我们应该怎么去面对它？如果你有着会被看作为“落伍”或者“没有品位”或者“丑陋而让人生厌”的危险，你还是大张旗鼓地去反对这种“美丽”的标准吗？
　　整个现代工业的历程无非在做着这样的事情：它试图把我们对生活中所有环节的看法都尽量简明扼要并统一标准，无论是时装，家居，还是我们冰箱里的食物，对于一个负责任的现代人来说，任何一种超出制造商能够提供的想法也许都是不够道德的。千篇一律是现代化大工业的需要，是降低生产成本的关键，如果全球的女性对“美丽”都有相同的看法，那么，这款有助于“美丽”的产品就可以在全世界的范围内出售。事实上，他们一直在这么做着，并得到了决定性的胜利。
　　在“标准”系列，这组波普风格画作中，杨冕表达了对这种越来越单调和重复的“美丽”标准的看法，这种看法也许在表达他的担忧，或者是戏谑与反讽，但我并不理解成为是一种愤怒，即使在他的每幅画作中都出现一道电波状的线条，也不意味着这是种强烈的挑衅。无论对于一个艺术家，或者是一个普通人，要真正大张旗鼓地反对我们目前的生存秩序都是困难的，虽然它是一种霸权的，单一的“标准”，但，它依然有存在的必要和价值。
　　任何一个活生生的，有血有肉的人，一旦出现在这些背景雷同手法相似的广告中，她就开始变得奇怪起来，她成为一个纯粹的象征符号，状态　　令人难以捉摸，这很像那张著名的画作《蒙娜丽莎的微笑》里的女主人公，我们只知道她是个悠闲的有钱妇女，可是谁也无法断定她表情中所寓意的喜怒哀乐，同样，我们也不知道这些出现在广告中的著名女性的真正想法，没有比这更表象化的事情了。尤其在AUPRES的彩妆广告中，赵薇用一种失魂落魄的眼神注视着大家，你无法考证她是否开心，是否对自己的生活满意，她似乎被自己所代言的商品吞噬掉了自己。产品商人一直在试图制造一种简单明了，通俗易懂的广告风格，而那些名女人们是工具，可是她们的状态看上去似乎连自己都没有说服，我不知道有多少人会对这些缺少灵魂的美丽玩偶着迷，这也许离商人的初衷距离甚远，可在某些时候，它成为现实。

　　Unexceptionally, they all have perfect complexions. No matter if she is Zhang Ziyi, Maggie Zhang, popular Korean plastic beauties, or the unknown new advertising actress, no matter what they are selling, VISA card, essence cream or shampoo, the image focus will be their seemingly perfect faces. It reminds us of beautiful words, for example, the freshest fruits, the tenderest rose and the most innocent angel. Only people in the fashion industry know the backstage stories of such angelic creations, when creative and mutually discriminating fashion workers finally cooperate with each other. The idea director of the commodity leads the expensive hairdresser, wardrobe expert, stylist, star or model, charging on an hourly basis. All of them are paid to shoot a completely unreal face in a studio as luminous as polar day. They are dream creators and they love it. When a worker modifies pictures of famous women into perfection with an Apple computer, concealing the blemishes on our bodies left by God, they are proud of it. They care nothing of the real faces of those models. As cocoa powder and sugar are only disorderly materials for a skilled baker, and his focus is to bake them into a decorative cake.
　　Actually, it is a process of visualizing “beauty”. Under the requirement and direction of powerful product manufacturers, fashion workers try to define standards of “beauty” for the public. This motivation is relevant to art creation, but more important, it is designed to meet the demands of a huge and globalized market.
　　Does “beauty” need its standards? If there was only one standard of “beauty” left, how would we face it? Would you take the risks of being regarded as “out-of-date”, having “no taste” or being “ugly and disgusting”? Would you fight against such standards of “beauty”?
　　The whole process of modern industrialization tries to simplify and standardize all of our opinions about every step we make, whether it is in fashion, home decoration or the food in our refrigerators. For modern people with a sense of responsibility, any idea beyond those provided by manufacturers can be immoral. Stereotypes are the fruits of modern industry, as well as the key to lowering production costs. If women all around the world have the same idea of “beauty”, “beauty” products are more easily sold around the world. They have been doing this for years and have achieved decisive success.
　　In his “Standards” series of POP style, Yang Mian expresses his opinion about increasingly simple and repeated standards of “beauty”. His opinion may express his worry, his sense-of-humor or irony, but I don’t see it as anger. Even though there is an electric wave-like line in each painting, I don’t think it represents strong provocation. For either an artist or a common person, it is difficult to fight against the order of our existing lives on a grand scale. Though it is a hegemonic 　　Ａnd single “standard”, it has its necessity and value of existence.
　　Appearing in these advertisements with similar background and methods, any real and vivid person would become strange. She becomes a pure symbol, with ambiguous status. Like the woman in the famous painting Mona Lisa; we know that she is a leisurely and rich woman, but nobody can define the emotion in her expression. Similarly, we don’t know the real thoughts of famous women in advertisements. There is nothing more idealized than this. In particular, in the make-up advertisement of AUPRES, Zhao Wei gazes at the audience with a distracted expression. We are unable to discover if she is happy and satisfied with her life. It seems that the products she is representing devoured her. Product manufacturers are trying to create a simple and understandable advertising style, and these famous women are only tools. However, it seems that they cannot even persuade themselves. I don’t know how many people these soulless and beautiful dolls enchant. It might be far away from the original intention of those manufactured. But sometimes it is true.
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　文章来源：《2005杨冕眼中的“标准”》