以形式之美跨越文化鸿沟——论伦敦现代主义运动对中国艺术的借鉴
|
摘要
本文通过以罗杰·弗莱和克莱夫·贝尔为代表的"布鲁姆斯伯里团体"美学思想与中国艺术关联的分析,探讨英国现代主义运动生成中的中国元素,认为弗莱和贝尔以形式审美作为进入中国艺术的门径,同时从自身艺术变革的需要出发再度阐释了中国艺术,使之成为西方现代主义形式美学观念形成的重要资源。弗莱和贝尔首先从重主观表现的美学思想出发,推崇中国艺术的散点透视与平面构图,进而还借鉴了韵律、留白的观念与技巧,使中国美学词汇成为现代主义的有机组成部分。与此同时,弗莱和贝尔对中国文化的阐释并未真正从中国语境出发,而与英国现代主义的发展相连,这就使得他们表面上非政治性的审美主义背后,又体现出隐含的政治性。
This paper is intended to demonstrate the Chinese elements embodied in the development of British Modernist literary movement through analyzing the connection between Chinese art and the aesthetic thoughts of British modern art critics Roger Fry and Clive Bell. Taking the formal aesthetics as the pathway of understanding Chinese art, Fry and Bell reinterpreted Chinese art so as to meet their own demand for art transformation, making it a significant source of Western Modernist formal aesthetics concept. Firstly, Fry and Bell praised highly the graphic composition and cavalier perspective methods in Chinese art owning to their preference for subjective expression in aesthetics concept. Secondly, they borrowed from Chinese art the notions and skills like "rhythm" and "space", making Chinese aesthetic terms an indispensable part of Modernism. However, their interpretation of Chinese culture seems more relevant to the development of British Modernism rather than the original Chinese context, adding certain political nature under its non-political aestheticism surface.
This paper is intended to demonstrate the Chinese elements embodied in the development of British Modernist literary movement through analyzing the connection between Chinese art and the aesthetic thoughts of British modern art critics Roger Fry and Clive Bell. Taking the formal aesthetics as the pathway of understanding Chinese art, Fry and Bell reinterpreted Chinese art so as to meet their own demand for art transformation, making it a significant source of Western Modernist formal aesthetics concept. Firstly, Fry and Bell praised highly the graphic composition and cavalier perspective methods in Chinese art owning to their preference for subjective expression in aesthetics concept. Secondly, they borrowed from Chinese art the notions and skills like "rhythm" and "space", making Chinese aesthetic terms an indispensable part of Modernism. However, their interpretation of Chinese culture seems more relevant to the development of British Modernism rather than the original Chinese context, adding certain political nature under its non-political aestheticism surface.
引文
(1)“布鲁姆斯伯里团体”(Bloomsbury Group)为20世纪上半叶英国著名的现代主义文学艺术群体,主体为剑桥出身的人文知识分子,重要成员包括历史学家G.L.迪金森、哲学家伯特兰·罗素、艺术鉴赏与评论家罗杰·弗莱、美学家克莱夫·贝尔、小说家弗吉尼亚·伍尔夫和E.M.福斯特、经济学家约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯、传记大师利顿·斯特拉齐和画家邓肯·格兰特等。
(1) J.K.Johnstone,The Bloomsbury Group:A Study of E.M.Forster,Lytton Strachey,Virginia Woolf,and Their Circle,London:Secker and Warburg,1954,p.20.
(2)[法]米丽耶·戴特丽:《18世纪到20世纪“中国之欧洲”的演进》,唐睿译,见《跨文化对话》第28辑,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2011年,第275页。
(3)[英]迈克尔·苏立文:《东西方艺术的交会》,赵潇译,上海:上海人民出版社,2014年,第229页。
(1) R.Fry“,Chinese Art at the Whitechapel Gallery”,Athenaeum,3 Aug.,1901,p.165.
(2) L.Binyon,Painting in the Far East,London:E.Arnold,1908.
(3)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《造型艺术中的表现与再现》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,沈语冰译,南京:江苏美术出版社,2010年,第81页。
(4) V.Woolf,Roger Fry:A Biography,London:Hogarth Press,1940,p.287.
(5) D.Sutton(ed.),Letters of Roger Fry,London:Chatto,1972,p.690.
(6) B.Gray,“The Development of Taste in Chinese Art in the West 1872 to 1972”,Studies in Chinese and Islamic Art,Vol1:Chinese Art,London:Pindar,1985,p.23.
(1)(2)(4)[英]克莱夫·贝尔:《艺术》,薛华译,南京:江苏教育出版社,2005年,第3-4页、第64页、第19页。
(3) R.Fry,Transformations:Critical and Speculative Essays on Art,London:Chatto,1926,p.68.
(5)[英]克莱夫·贝尔:《艺术》,第19页脚注1。
(6)[意大利]利玛窦、[法]金尼阁:《利玛窦中国札记》,何高济等译,北京:中华书局,1983年,第22页。
(1)[英]迈克尔·苏立文:《东西方艺术的交会》,第119页。
(2)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《视觉与设计》,易英译,南京:江苏教育出版社,2005年,第13页。
(3)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《后印象派画家》,《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第102页。
(4) R.Fry,“Oriental Art”,Quarterly Review 212,1910,p.228.
(5)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《格拉夫顿画廊(之一)》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第106-107页。
(6)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《后印象主义》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第128页。
(1)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《德尼〈塞尚〉译序》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第98页。
(2) L.Edel,Bloomsbury:A House of Lions,London:The Hogarth Press,1979,p.161.
(3) R.Fry,Characteristics of French Art,London:Chatto&Windus,1932,p.146.
(4)转自J.B.Bullen(ed.),Post-Impressionism in England,London:Routledge,1988,p.133.
(5)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《后印象主义》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第125页。
(6) R.Fry“,The French Group”,Grafton Gallery,p.13.
(7)(8)(9)(10)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《线条之为现代艺术中的表现手段》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第216页、第213页、第213页、第217页。
(1) R.Fry,Transformations:Critical and Speculative Essays on Art,London:Chatto,1926,p.73.
(2)[加]S.P.罗森鲍姆编著:《岁月与海浪:布鲁姆斯伯里文化圈人物群像》,徐冰译,南京:江苏教育出版社,2006年,第37页。
(3) R.Fry,Transformations:Critical and Speculative Essays on Art,p.50.
(4) R.Fry,Last Lectures,Cambridge:CUP,1939,p.149.
(5) H.Lin,“Reconciling Bloomsbury’s Aesthetics of Formalism with the Politics of Anti-Imperialism:Roger Fry’s and Clive Bell’s Interpretations of Chinese Art”,Concentric:Studies in English Literature and Linguistics,vol.27,2001,p.171.
(1)[美]帕特丽卡·劳伦斯:《丽莉·布瑞斯珂的中国眼睛》,万江波等译,上海:上海书店出版社,2008年,第15页。
(2)参见[英]雷蒙·道森:《中国变色龙--对于欧洲中国文明观的分析》,常绍民、明毅译,北京:中华书局,2006年。
(1) J.K.Johnstone,The Bloomsbury Group:A Study of E.M.Forster,Lytton Strachey,Virginia Woolf,and Their Circle,London:Secker and Warburg,1954,p.20.
(2)[法]米丽耶·戴特丽:《18世纪到20世纪“中国之欧洲”的演进》,唐睿译,见《跨文化对话》第28辑,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2011年,第275页。
(3)[英]迈克尔·苏立文:《东西方艺术的交会》,赵潇译,上海:上海人民出版社,2014年,第229页。
(1) R.Fry“,Chinese Art at the Whitechapel Gallery”,Athenaeum,3 Aug.,1901,p.165.
(2) L.Binyon,Painting in the Far East,London:E.Arnold,1908.
(3)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《造型艺术中的表现与再现》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,沈语冰译,南京:江苏美术出版社,2010年,第81页。
(4) V.Woolf,Roger Fry:A Biography,London:Hogarth Press,1940,p.287.
(5) D.Sutton(ed.),Letters of Roger Fry,London:Chatto,1972,p.690.
(6) B.Gray,“The Development of Taste in Chinese Art in the West 1872 to 1972”,Studies in Chinese and Islamic Art,Vol1:Chinese Art,London:Pindar,1985,p.23.
(1)(2)(4)[英]克莱夫·贝尔:《艺术》,薛华译,南京:江苏教育出版社,2005年,第3-4页、第64页、第19页。
(3) R.Fry,Transformations:Critical and Speculative Essays on Art,London:Chatto,1926,p.68.
(5)[英]克莱夫·贝尔:《艺术》,第19页脚注1。
(6)[意大利]利玛窦、[法]金尼阁:《利玛窦中国札记》,何高济等译,北京:中华书局,1983年,第22页。
(1)[英]迈克尔·苏立文:《东西方艺术的交会》,第119页。
(2)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《视觉与设计》,易英译,南京:江苏教育出版社,2005年,第13页。
(3)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《后印象派画家》,《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第102页。
(4) R.Fry,“Oriental Art”,Quarterly Review 212,1910,p.228.
(5)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《格拉夫顿画廊(之一)》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第106-107页。
(6)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《后印象主义》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第128页。
(1)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《德尼〈塞尚〉译序》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第98页。
(2) L.Edel,Bloomsbury:A House of Lions,London:The Hogarth Press,1979,p.161.
(3) R.Fry,Characteristics of French Art,London:Chatto&Windus,1932,p.146.
(4)转自J.B.Bullen(ed.),Post-Impressionism in England,London:Routledge,1988,p.133.
(5)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《后印象主义》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第125页。
(6) R.Fry“,The French Group”,Grafton Gallery,p.13.
(7)(8)(9)(10)[英]罗杰·弗莱:《线条之为现代艺术中的表现手段》,见《弗莱艺术批评文选》,第216页、第213页、第213页、第217页。
(1) R.Fry,Transformations:Critical and Speculative Essays on Art,London:Chatto,1926,p.73.
(2)[加]S.P.罗森鲍姆编著:《岁月与海浪:布鲁姆斯伯里文化圈人物群像》,徐冰译,南京:江苏教育出版社,2006年,第37页。
(3) R.Fry,Transformations:Critical and Speculative Essays on Art,p.50.
(4) R.Fry,Last Lectures,Cambridge:CUP,1939,p.149.
(5) H.Lin,“Reconciling Bloomsbury’s Aesthetics of Formalism with the Politics of Anti-Imperialism:Roger Fry’s and Clive Bell’s Interpretations of Chinese Art”,Concentric:Studies in English Literature and Linguistics,vol.27,2001,p.171.
(1)[美]帕特丽卡·劳伦斯:《丽莉·布瑞斯珂的中国眼睛》,万江波等译,上海:上海书店出版社,2008年,第15页。
(2)参见[英]雷蒙·道森:《中国变色龙--对于欧洲中国文明观的分析》,常绍民、明毅译,北京:中华书局,2006年。