與他讓人熟知的“夜景”系列不一樣，康海濤是在一片虛無中建構(gòu)起展覽中的這些繪畫的，他既不面對一個既定的視覺客體，如夜晚的建筑與樹叢、光線或陰影，也不面對一種心理的經(jīng)驗，如恍惚、安寧或抑郁。甚至他也不面對那些畫面上最終出現(xiàn)的若有若無的意象——在之前的某個階段，康海濤經(jīng)常一開始就設(shè)定好畫面中的意象，而在他現(xiàn)在的這些畫中，作為畫家的他最初只是面對著一片空白。
畫家眼前的虛無其實就是他面對的白紙或空畫布，當(dāng)這一小片空白不再與任何對象或內(nèi)容有著先定關(guān)系的時候，繪畫就從名詞變成了動詞，繪畫被還原成了一個無預(yù)設(shè)目標(biāo)的行動。實際上，康海濤就是從隨意的涂抹開始這些作品的，然后對那些最初涂抹帶來的混飩存在做出判斷，繼續(xù)下一步的工作。之后的工作可以用Ge-stell來形容。
Ge-stell是海德格爾用來揭示現(xiàn)代技術(shù)本質(zhì)的一個術(shù)語。他認(rèn)為技術(shù)乃至現(xiàn)代世界的本質(zhì)上源于一種表象性思維，世界分成了主客體，人對存在者產(chǎn)生了工具性的要求，存在者被擺置出來，成為了對象，也被分門別類集中起來，形成了類屬。在抽象的意義上，Ge-stell即“集置”，但Ge-stell這個詞是海德格爾對德語Gestell一詞的改造，Gestell的含義是支架、框架或底座，他增加了一個連接符使原來名詞獲得了動作感，因此Ge-stell也經(jīng)常被翻譯為“座架”、“構(gòu)架”。
在康海濤這里，Ge-stell首先是一種形象的暗示，他最近的很多繪畫中都出現(xiàn)了類似于支架或框架的形象；其次，Ge-stell也是一種繪畫方式，他反復(fù)地、試探性地生成出長條狀的筆觸，帶來空間的分割與匯聚；最后，Ge-stell更是對何為繪畫的一種理解，康海濤的這些繪畫不是對任何既定對象的描繪，而是對未知畫面的不斷構(gòu)設(shè)，畫面呈現(xiàn)的過程，即繪畫方法本身已成為了繪畫的內(nèi)容。
在今天，人們習(xí)慣性地把康海濤的這些作品歸入“抽象”，這里要提醒的是“抽象”作為一種風(fēng)格與“抽象”作為一種主義是不同的，前者只是一種印象式的藝術(shù)分類，后者則是一種嚴(yán)格的藝術(shù)史敘事。而在中國，藝術(shù)史敘事意義上的抽象主義是不存在的，雖然這不妨礙人們用“抽象”這個概念來理解很多藝術(shù)家的作品，比如康海濤的這些繪畫。
但更進一步地討論，實際上，康海濤的這些“抽象”作品是從他的寫實性繪畫中發(fā)展出來的，他從寫實題材中剝離出了風(fēng)格與方法，也壓縮了色彩與形式，但又保留了他“夜景”系列中的諸多因素，比如空間感、透光感，以及深色背景。尤其是在一些卡紙上的作品中，顏料材質(zhì)薄涂帶來的透明感與“夜景”系列中的空氣透光感呈現(xiàn)著一種內(nèi)部的默契。值得一提的是，在康海濤的日常工作中，“夜景”系列與“抽象”系列是同時進行的，兩者互為補充、互相契合，達成著一種存在的完滿。
這些作品中的線條經(jīng)常既是純粹的形式，也是造型的筆觸，而不同線條之間也既構(gòu)成著平面上的覆蓋、疊加性的空間關(guān)系，也不時地出現(xiàn)視覺錯覺意義上空間深度關(guān)系，甚至線條與線條也會形成造型明暗關(guān)系。正是在這個意義上，可以說康海濤是不同于藝術(shù)史敘事中的“抽象主義”的，因為他并不在乎抽象主義所包含的平面性、非形象性等一系列的實在主義訴求。甚至，康海濤經(jīng)常會有意使繪畫停留在前意象的狀態(tài)，并通過作品標(biāo)題的文學(xué)性來暗示其圖像的意象性。
在這些意義上，康海濤的繪畫就不僅僅是畫面上的部分了，它們還包含著一種世界觀，一種對存在的理解。用海德格爾的話說，藝術(shù)的真理性在今天可能比科學(xué)乃至哲學(xué)都要重要，因為只有藝術(shù)才能夠抵御現(xiàn)代性分化與工具化所帶來的經(jīng)驗日趨貧乏。對康海濤的作品來說，或許可以用一個更貼切的詞語去替代“真理性”這樣的說法，即靈性。
Ge-stell Unlike his famed “night scenes” series, Kang Haitao composed his paintings for this exhibit from a vast void. He was neither confronted by fixed visual objects, such as buildings or clumps of trees, or light and shadows in the dark, nor deal with some kind of psychological experience, such as confusion, quietude, or melancholy. He is not even bothered by the obscure images in his finished composition – during a certain earlier phase, Kang Haitao often made up his mind about what the final image would be on the canvas as he began to paint. However, in these paintings, Kang was confronted by an infinite emptiness at the very beginning of his act of creating. The void facing the painter is none other than the blank paper or canvas. When this small blank space lacks a pre-existing relationship with any object or context, “painting” is transformed from a noun to a verb; it is restored to an aimless act. In truth, Kang Haitao started working on these paintings in a casual fashion, then he made his judgment on the chaotic composition arising from his initial impulse before deciding on his next move. Afterwards, subsequent steps of the creative process may be described as Ge-stell. Ge-stell is a term used by the German philosopher Martin Heidegger to describe what lies behind or beneath the essence of modern technology. He perceived the essence of technology and the modern world as originating from representative thinking, wherein the world is divided into subject and object. Humans have an instrumental need towards Beings, and Beings become an object which can be assembled and divided into categories. Ge-stell is a German word that was reinvented from Gestell by Heidegger. Gestell literally refers to “rack” or “framework”, and by adding a hyphen between Ge and stell, it was given an active role. For Heidegger, Ge-stell is a challenging, or performative "gathering together", for the purpose of revealing or presentation. For Kang Haitao, Ge-stell is, first of all, the implication of image. Many of his recent paintings reveal images similar to rack or framework. Secondly, Ge-stell is a painting style for Kang. He repeatedly experimented with long bars to either divide or concentrate space. Lastly, Ge-stell is Kang’s definition towards painting. Kang Haitao’s paintings are not descriptions of any existing objects but a continual development of an unknown composition. The process of creating a composition, or his manner of painting, has become the context of his creative work. Today, people customarily regard Kang Haitao’s Ge-stell works as “abstract” painting. Nevertheless, it is worthy of note that there is a difference between “‘a(chǎn)bstract’ as a style” and “‘a(chǎn)bstract’ as an ‘-ism’”. The former is an art category in people’s mind, while the latter is a scrupulous narrative of art history. In China, abstract-ism does not occur in the narrative of art history, but this aspect does not prevent people from using an “abstract” concept when trying to interpret the works of various artists, i.e. Kang Haitao’s Ge-stell paintings. Close observation reveals that Kang Haitao’s “abstract” works have in fact evolved from his realistic paintings. He has separated the elements of style and method from realistic objects, compressed colors and forms, yet at the same time, retained other features in his “night scenes” series, i.e. the sense of space and translucency, as well as the dark background. This distinctive trait is especially apparent in his work done on cardboard. The sense of translucency created by a thin layer of paints and the atmospheric translucency of the “night scenes” series are identical, demonstrating an unspoken harmony. What is more, Kang Haitao, in the course of his workday, will work on both his “night scenes” series and “abstract” series. They compliment and accord with one another, jointly accomplishing a sense of satisfaction with existence. The contours of these works are often both simple lines as well as brushwork style. They cover the surface of the work and overlap to form a spacial correlation. From time to time, they create a sense of depth due to visual illusion. Moreover, his contours are arranged so as to produce a contrast between light and darkness. In this manner, Kang Haitao’s works are very different from the “abstract-ism”, as found in the art history narrative, because he does not care to include the planarity and nonfigurative traits favored by abstract art. Often, Kang Haitao even goes so far as to intentionally halt the painting composition in a pre-imagery state, and employ a literary title as a means to imply the image of his painting. From this viewpoint, the significance of Kang Haitao’s painting is not limited to the composition itself. It embodies a kind of world view and Kang’s existential perception. It is just as Heidegger suggested: the reality of art is more important than modern science or philosophy, because art is the only weapon to withstand the paucity of daily experience resulting from the polarization and mechanization of modern times. Perhaps, for Kang Haitao’s works, the word “reality” may be substituted by a more appropriate term: “spirituality”.