时间:1999年7月 地点:张仃寓所 陈:张仃先生,自您的《守住中国画的底线》文章发表以后,引起了极大的反响,各地报刊围绕这一问题发表不同意见的文章粗略地估计一下便有数十篇之多。我觉得有的文章并没有真正领会您关于中国画笔墨问题的见解,讨论的水平便难以提高。可否请您就这一问题再谈谈自己的看法? 张:可以。关于“等墨等于零”这一提法,六、七年前我就听说过,当时没当回事,因为“笔墨”已是个常识问题。后来又有人说这是吴冠中先生说的,开始我不相信,心想可能传说走样了。直到1997年11月13日《中国文化报》刊登了吴先生的文章,《中国画研究院通讯》黑心载了全文,我这才知道果真是这样的。去年举办中国画山水画和油画风景画的展览,由我负责中国画方面的工作,要开研讨会,这时才引起我的深思,才知道吴先生在1991年在香港便和万青力先生有过争论,1992年3月香港的《明报周刊》 Time: July, 1999 Venue: Zhangding Residence Chen: Mr. Zhang Ding, after your publication of the article “Holding the Bottom Line of Chinese Painting,” aroused great repercussions. Articles published around the world in newspapers and newspapers with different opinions on this issue roughly Estimated there are dozens of articles. I think some articles do not really understand your opinion on the issue of Chinese painting and calligraphy, the level of discussion will be difficult to improve. May I ask you to talk about your own views on this issue? As for the reference to “equal ink equal to zero”, I heard about six or seven years ago when I did not think seriously because “writing and ink” is a matter of common sense. Later, some people say that this is Mr. Wu Guanzhong said, I do not believe the beginning, I thought maybe the legendary. Until November 13, 1997, “China Culture Daily” published Mr. Wu’s article, “Chinese Academy of Communication” black heart filled with the full text, I just realized that really is the case. Last year, I organized an exhibition of Chinese landscape paintings and landscape paintings. As I was responsible for the work on Chinese painting, I had to hold a seminar. At that time, I was thinking about it. Only then did I know that Mr WU had a dispute with Mr Wan Qingli in Hong Kong in 1991 March 1992 Hong Kong’s “Ming Pao Weekly”