欧洲人或者美国人,他们在谈论一种艺术时,可以不援引非洲或者亚洲的作品名称和理论观点。但那样一种谈论又没有将自己的陈述限定为“欧洲艺术”或“北美艺术”,在这里,一种进化论的结构总是潜在的成为前提,以至在西方之外是可以忽略的。 但在欧洲和北美等“中心圈”外,比如中国等“非中心圈”,人们如果不将西方艺术史视作与传统断裂,而直接将自己看作西方艺术的“加盟者”,至少愿意以一种整合的目光,作“世界艺术”的重新拼图,建立新的背景分布图、分类、命名和评价指标。但这样字面上可以成立的设想,一旦进入现实的具体语境,却难免受到实践对此的抵制。 首先在女权主义中,就可以看到类似困境。这场对男性的颠覆从具有某种自足的女性经验开始,借以颠覆依据男性逻辑建立起的艺术话语系统。这场努力最终取 Europeans or Americans who, while talking about an art, may not invoke the work’s title and theoretical point of view in Africa or Asia. But such a discussion did not limit his statement to “European art” or “North American art,” where an evolutionary structure is always a potential precondition and can be neglected beyond the West. However, outside the “central circle” in Europe and North America, such as “non-central circle” such as China, people will directly regard themselves as “franchisees” of Western art if they do not regard Western art history as a traditional break, at least willing With an integrated look, make a new puzzle of “world art,” create new background maps, classify, name, and evaluate indicators. However, the assumption of such a literal establishment can hardly be avoided by practice once it enters the specific context of reality. First in feminism, you can see a similar predicament. This subversion of men begins with a somewhat self-contained female experience in order to subvert the system of artistic discourse founded on male logic. This effort is finally taken