印象主义繪画对中国画家来說,并不是什么新鮮东西,很早以前就和它打过交道了。那么,为什么今天又把它当作問題提出来呢?情况是这样的:有人說印象主义就是現实主义。这就是問题了。什么是印象主义,抑或什么是現实主义,这豈不是值得研究的嗎?对于这問題,人們的看法是复杂的,决不象我們說得这样簡單?唤龆杂∠笾饕濉⒍袁F实主义有这样或那样的理解或解釋,而且也涉及到对社会主义現实主义的理解,等等。因此,把印象主义作为問題提出来討論、研究就很有必要和好处。其次,把印象主义繪画作为艺术遗产来看,又有是否可以繼承与借鑑的問題。印象主义繪画有我們值得学習的地方,这是肯定的;但是学它的什么呢?我們决不拒絕繼承和借鑑古人和外国人,“那怕是封建阶級和資产阶級的东西”,但是繼承和借鑑决不是代替自己的創造。“文学艺术中对于古人和外国人的毫無批判的硬搬和模仿,乃是最沒有出息的最害人的文学教条主义和艺术教条主义。”对待印象主义,不能因为它不是社会主义現实主义就一棒打倒;另方面,也不能因为它有可取之处就全盤肯定。在这个問題上,“左”或“右”的偏向都是不好的。为了便于大家研究,这一期选發了四篇譯文。其中“反对印象主义及其殘余”一文和苏联大百科全書对“印象主义”的解釋,都是最近苏联美术界展开学术討論以前的文章,作为材料,供大家参考。这四篇譯文可与本刊去年十二月号中所發表的“关于繪画的几点感想”和“美术家和人民”兩篇譯文,以及“苏联美术界展开学术討論”的报导和这一期的“苏联美术界繼續展开学术討論”的报导一併参閱。配合文章也發表了一些有关繪画作品。若想对印象主义有全面的認識,仅仅依靠这些作品当然是不够的,而在“哪些画家是印象主义画家”的問題上,如今看法也并不一致,还值得研究。这些譯文以及有关作品,就作为引子,供大家进一步研究和討論的参考吧。 Impressionist painting is not something new to Chinese painters, dealing with it long ago. So, why is it put forward again today as a problem? The situation is this: Some people say that impressionism is realism. This is the problem. What is impressionism, or what is realism, is not it worthwhile to study? For this issue, people’s opinions are complex, not as we say so simple? Call young people, gluttonous 濉 ⒍ Yuan F Realism has one way or another of understanding or explaining it, but it also involves the understanding of socialist realism, and so on. Therefore, it is necessary and beneficial to study Impressionism as an issue to discuss. Secondly, the impressionist painting as an artistic heritage point of view, but also whether the problem can be inherited and borrowed. Impressionist painting has a place where we can learn. This is affirmative; but what does it take to learn it? We will never refuse to inherit and learn from the ancients and foreigners. “Even the feudal and bourgeois things” , But inheritance and reference are by no means to replace their own creation. “The unceremonious hard copy and imitation of the ancients and foreigners in literary and artistic works is the most undisputed literary dogmatism and artistic dogmatism.” To treat Impressionism can not be because it is not a socialist reality On the other hand, it can not be entirely affirmed because of its merits. On this issue, the “left” or “right” bias is not good. In order to facilitate the study, four translations were issued in this issue. Among them, the article “Against Impressionism and Its Remnants” and the interpretation of “Impressionism” by the Encyclopedia of the Soviet Union are all the articles published before the academic discussions in the Soviet art community recently. They are for reference. These four translations can be compared with the two translations of “Some Thoughts about Painting” and “Artists and People” published in the December issue of this year, as well as the “Academic Discussion by the Soviet Art Community” and this The first issue of “Soviet art circles to continue academic discussions,” the report read together. In line with the article also published a number of paintings. It is of course not enough to rely solely on these works for a full understanding of Impressionism. Now, on the question of “which painters are impressionist painters,” the present view is not consistent and worthy of study. These translations and related works, as cited, for your further study and discussion of it.