论文部分内容阅读
今天,考古发现层出不穷,对民间美术也有更多关注,美术史的材料大大扩充。美术史家们一直想从中筛选出最有价值的部分,整理出有重点的早期美术史和民间美术史。但是,他们却显得力不从心。一是考古发现和民间美术作品的系统与传统书画的系统有根本不同,二是本体的研究在当前的学术发展趋势中越来越处于边缘地位。如是导致一部美术通史中前后的叙述方式很不统一。把画学的叙述品评方式简单套用于考古发现品和民间美术品也易导致研究中的误区。应该看到,对艺术本体的系统性研究中同样包含很多问题,不应回避,而应视作展开更高层面的分析与研究的基础。美术史需要通过直面本体的研究确立作为独立学科的底线。
Today, after an endless stream of archaeological discoveries, more attention has been paid to folk art, and materials for art history have been greatly expanded. Art historians have always wanted to screen out the most valuable part of the focus of the early art history and folk art history. However, they seem powerless. First, the system of archaeological discoveries and folk art works is fundamentally different from that of traditional calligraphy and painting. Second, the study of ontology is getting more and more marginalized in the current academic development trend. As a result, the way of narration around a general history of fine art is not uniform. It is also easy to lead the misunderstandings in the study by simply applying narrative style of painting to archaeological discoveries and folk art objects. It should be noted that the systematic study of the art ontology also contains many problems that should not be sidestepped, but should be regarded as the basis for launching a higher level of analysis and research. Art history needs to be established as the bottom line of independent discipline through the study of the ontology itself.