论文部分内容阅读
贡布里希关于“美学作为一种审美理论是空洞”的看法,并不意味着我们不能因此而实际地考察其美学思想。历史性地看,贡布里希的美学思想是在文艺复兴以来批评的文化史传统中做出的,与该传统本身有着直接的反思性关联。与以往对其美学理论进行的整体重构性研究所不同的是,本文将尝试从纵向角度的一个侧面出发,关注其风景美学,并置于黑格尔为背景的文化史寻求中,以及以罗斯金的风景美学为参照的思想史考察中,探讨他特定的审美和历史观,以此可以作为我们当下对史学思想的一个关联性思考。具体地来说,罗斯金的《现代画家》一向被认为是19世纪风景美学的集大成之作,而贡布里希的长文《文艺复兴时期的艺术理论和风景画的兴起》则被认为是20世纪研究风景画起源及其理论的开创性作品。二者之间文本分析的差异,预设并渗透着对风景画的不同审美感受和历史意识。对此,本文将从二者风景美学之背景、文本、人物几个方面展开相关论述,并以风景美学之文化史的对话为结语,作为实在与心灵、过去和现在,以及理论和经验之间可能的沟通和关于“看”对人类理解之意义的新的生成。
Gombrich’s notion that “aesthetics as a kind of esthetic theory is a hollow ” does not mean that we should not examine its aesthetics in a practical way. Historically, Gombrich’s aesthetic ideas were made in the tradition of cultural history criticized since the Renaissance, in direct reflective relation to the tradition itself. Different from the overall reconstruction of the aesthetics theory, this paper tries to focus on one aspect of the landscape aesthetics and place it in the pursuit of cultural history in the background of Hegel, In his study of the history of thoughts, John Ruskin’s landscape aesthetics explores his specific aesthetic and historical views, which can be regarded as a related thinking of the contemporary history thoughts. Specifically, Ruskin’s “modern painter” has always been regarded as a masterpiece of 19th-century landscape aesthetics, while Gombrich’s long article “Rise of Renaissance Art Theories and Landscapes” is considered The Beginning Works of the 20th Century Researching the Origin of Landscape Painting and Its Theory. The difference of textual analysis between the two presupposes and infiltrates the different aesthetic feelings and historical awareness of landscape painting. In this regard, this article will start from the background of the two aspects of landscape aesthetics, texts and figures, and concludes with the dialogue of the cultural history of landscape aesthetics as the reality and soul, past and present, as well as between theory and experience Possible communication and new generation about the meaning of “seeing” for human understanding.