关于美术批评的文章,我已写过几篇,大都发在了《美术观察》,但是,作为批评的从业者,我一直有一种恐惧——稍不留神就刹车失灵。因为这失灵的刹车,批评的对象往往在批评者的笔下变得和孔子、庄子甚至海德格尔一样的伟大。各种大词,比如大地、存在、人性、终级关怀,等等,也都一股脑地颁给了被评论的人。当“阐释”成为一种学问之后,一些大词便开始满天飞舞,否则,这门学科又该如何支撑?不过,这并不是问题的关键。问题的关键在于,缺了这类词,一些批评家的文章可能就写不下去了。随便找到一 I’ve written a few articles about art criticism, mostly in Art Watch, but I have always had the fear of being a critic of my own practice - brakes a little inattentively. Because of this malfunctioning brake, the object of criticism often becomes as critically acclaimed as Confucius, Zhuangzi, and even Heidegger. All kinds of big words, such as the earth, existence, human nature, ultimate care, and so on, are also presented to commented people. When “interpretations” became a kind of knowledge, some big words began to skyrocket, otherwise, how should the discipline support? However, this is not the crux of the matter. The crux of the matter is that in the absence of such words, some critics’ articles may not be written. Just find one