Skip to main content


I always liken the control of rage to the cradling of an animal infant- one has to keep a vigilant eye on its unpredictable mischiefs, and the task is made difficult when all the time the carer imparts a language alien to the baby, and the baby the carer. Rage rarely speaks in a language I comprehend and often appears in a manner of extreme intractability. In images or visions rage is, typically, the abrupt fire that burns all, leaving the barren land that parches under the ruthless sun. Rage can be also found throbbing fitfully in every visible vein of one’s pallid skin, and sooner or later one’s body of map will be crisscrossed with an army of red snakes. Fire and red are principally the two words that epitomize rage. When confronted by the formidable presence of rage, even the most glacial ice bows down in defeat and cries the waxen tears that leave an imperceptible trace on the scorching ground.

The title of a Cy Twombly’s painting sums up all: The Fire that Consumes All before It (1978). The juxtaposition of white and red makes the latter look more like flaming blood than fire- a blotch of flaring red bleeds into the slightly-tainted white. If it were a fire then it must be a destructive fire of envy. It is with such aggression and impetus that the fire of envy is keen on destroying everything that it is not: I am thinking about some clichéd fairy-tale of a misunderstood monster gruesomely defiling an innocent maiden when the later is stubbornly unresponsive to the former’s awkward, persistent courtships. This then becomes not so much a painting of encroachment but the natural law of affection.

Colours are not the only manifestation of rage, for it also leaves its temporary marks on human faces sometimes. The creation of Leonardo da Vinci’s Caricature Head Study of an Old Man (c. 1500-05) was only a matter of a few scrawls and strokes, but rage is self-expressive. This old man’s rage is visibly tinged with a Job’s desperation: both eyes and chin direct to the Heaven; the glint of menace in his eyes speaks positively of indignation and bitterness that only those who spend a chunk of their lives being misjudged and underestimated will know. Leonardo da Vince is one of the few who illustrate sundry human emotions like some drolleries read in the Canterbury Tales; not without some pathos of a great Medieval tragedy.

To a certain extent rage can appear in a form that utterly betrays its essence. Call it a reckless misinterpretation but Yves Klein’s output in the Blue Epoch seems to me a phalanx of the artist’s pent-up anger. Executed solely in the patented International Klein Blue (IKB), the colour expresses a feeling of extreme disquietude. Mostly those IKBs are bestowed with lives and souls, but what resulted on the canvases display no harmonious melodies that frequent Jackson Pollock’s. Some of them are rhythmically violent and chaotic. The colours are flung onto the canvases disdainfully. Slowly, however, when eyes are patient enough to dwell a considerable period on those paintings, the desultory morass of IKBs seem to come into a specific form, and at length we might want to land in the context, the concept, a beguiling story.

Rage might express itself in the most indecipherable, and sometimes when it chooses to appear in the form of a spitfire that sputters and spews despite others’ incomprehension, esoteric language. But always the image of rage cannot be more obvious and clear. The art of rage is a three-stage transmutation: the artist translates his abstract feelings into a concrete art piece and as the viewers witness the artwork, it is allowed to transforms back into an impression that installed in their memories. And thus the fire of rage proves to be indistinguishable. It seethes until the time is ripe and there everything unleashes.


Popular posts from this blog

Honore Daumier

“If you shut up truth and bury it under ground, it will but grow, and gather to itself such explosive power that the day it bursts through it will blow up everything in its way.”- Émile Zola
Exited Honoré Victorin Daumier, 10 February 1879, in an impoverishment that many of his contemporaries, especially his foes, would have thought was his long overdue retribution- the painter was blind, heavily in debt, and later relegated to a pauper’s grave. His friends, upon visiting his resting place, would, I imagine, see it a chance to admonish their children: “Now that’s a lesson for you cheeky devils whose tongues rattle off things that should better stay unspoken.” But Daumier devoted his life in revealing those “unspoken things.” His lithography ink proved sharper than most writers’ pens. He vented his rage and stigmatised others’ infamy in his satirical and, oftentimes, side-splitting cartoons. The tone was relentlessly acerbic but only because Daumier was exposing truths that, in the time…

Review: Late Spring (1949)

As a storyteller, Yasujiro Ozu insists on an implausibly objective stance that refrains from direct commentary or criticism; his camera customarily assumes the role of a detached observer, to whom the characters in the film, staring or talking straight to the camera, occasionally address, with an intimacy akin to that between a host and his guest, a closeness that is underpinned by a mutual recognition of the psychological distance that separates the two. The audience, whose perspective, in this case, conflates the camera’s (the director’s), an invisible character’s in the film (to whom the other characters address) and their own, is thus situated amidst this spatial complexity which, as a rule, every work of art necessarily creates.
In Late Spring (1948), the camera serves in part as an underlying comment to the story, which is noted by its economy of details. A prolonged shot of a departing train, on which the father and daughter travel to the city for a one-day excursion, prefigures…

Review: Breathless (1960)

Jean Luc Godard’s first feature feels oddly like a swansong: in many respects the film seems a self-mockery of what it ostensibly celebrates – the new, the bold, the reckless; the 60s zeitgeist that resurrects the anguished ghosts of the 1920s, who, according to F. Scott Fitzgerald, grow up to “find all Gods dead, all wars fought, all faith in man shaken.” For the children of the ‘60s, their wars are of a kind in which the opponents constantly change roles: sometimes they are the unmerciful authorities bent on making miserable lives out of their inferiors; in other times they are the society at large, weeding out in its insidious and devious way the errant law-breakers. They all seem to be donning the same masks, through which the warriors recognise themselves.
This fight with one’s inner demon necessarily evokes concerns of mortality and death - timeless concerns that acquire an added pungency in the 1960s: would a dangerous, unheeding spell of hedonism finally defy life’s incontrove…