- 503
Liang Quan
Description
- Liang Quan
- A White Horse Is Not A Horse
- Signed by right margin
- ink, colour and collage on paper, framed
- 2007
Provenance
Literature
Condition
"In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective, qualified opinion. Prospective buyers should also refer to any Important Notices regarding this sale, which are printed in the Sale Catalogue.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS PRINTED IN THE SALE CATALOGUE."
Catalogue Note
Liang Quan delights audiences with a marriage of the aesthetics of abstract art with the philosophy of traditional Chinese culture. Though it is tempting to liken his work to Western masters such as Cy Twombly or Agnes Martin, Liang Quan roots his oeuvre within the Chinese ink tradition, commenting, "Some (Chinese) artists use brushwork to express themselves, others use ink I, however, use paper as the foundation of my expression." For Liang Quan, the line of ink is not created by the brush, but instead through the edges of paper created through collage. The lines of torn paper mixed with colored accents and shapes articulate the rhythm of a landscape—like the score of a musical symphony, visually articulated line-by-line, phrase-by-phrase.
"The White Horse Dialogue"
Question: Can it be that a white horse is not a horse? Advocate: It can. Objector: How?
Advocate: "Horse" is that by means of which one names the shape. "White" is that by means of which one names the color. What names the color is not what names the shape. Hence, I say that a white horse is not a horse.
Objector: If there are white horses, one cannot say that there are no horses. If one cannot say that there are no horses, doesn't that mean that there are horses? For there to be white horses is for there to be horses. How could it be that the white ones are not horses?
Advocate: If one wants a horse, that extends to a yellow or black horse. But if one wants a white horse, that does not extend to a yellow or black horse. Suppose that a white horse were a horse. Then what one wants [in the two cases] would be the same. If what one wants were the same, then a white [horse] would not differ from a horse. If what one wants does not differ, then how is it that a yellow or black horse is sometimes acceptable and sometimes unacceptable? It is clear that acceptable and unacceptable are mutually contrary. Hence, yellow and black horses are the same [in that, if there are yellow or black horses], one can respond that there are horses, but one cannot respond that there are white horses. Thus, it is evident that a white horse is not a horse.1
1The White Horse Dialogue (Baima lun), from Master Gongsun Long (Gongsun Long zi), translation by Bryan Van Norden, in "On the White Horse," in Readings in Classical Chinese Philosophy, ed. P.J. Ivanhoe and Bryan W. Van Norden (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2005), pp. 364–65