In the history of art, Duchamp has often been deified as a revolutionary. However, Thierry de Duve, an art critic, believes that Duchamp is not a revolutionary, but just a “messenger”. Duchamp’s message – “everything can become art” – actually originates from the ‘1880 Paris Salon d’Autumn’.

Regardless of whether Duve’s viewpoint is reliable or not, it at least reminds us that no artist is truly a revolutionary, whether in the endless history of art or in the turbulence of the contemporary world. The artist is just a fisherman of information, the first “messenger” to convey the impending change.

In other words, the role played by art (artist) is not a historical summoner or a future (blind) visionary, but rather a (initial) medium that connects the past and the future.

At this point, the significance of avantgarde is not so much what it has changed but rather what it has brought in view of the past.

In the post-internet era, trying to change society through art or envisioning a future as a whole are becoming increasingly difficult. Artists, mediating between history and future, are limited to exploring the possibility of future changes, or to share a notice of what we are experiencing but have not yet discovered.

Looking at the artists in our “Messenger” exhibition, whether it is Jin Feng’s letter to Dürer, Kopernik; Feng Junyuan; Gong Chenyu’s image archeology about the technology of medieval knights; Li Hanwei’s algorithmic painting in the digital desert; Guo Cheng; Liu Xin’s (low) tech ecological warning; the overflow and resistance of Wang Sishun’s physical abilities; or Wang Rui’s magical fairy tales or fables… these all remind us that we are experiencing unknown changes.

This kind of change is happening continuously, hundreds of years ago, decades ago, or several years ago, while another more profound change is in the making. Within this setting, the artist is merely a humble messenger, quietly exercising his mission. They therefore do not expect to be discovered by their contemporaries.