论文部分内容阅读
不可否认,在中国艺术中,书法与绘画关系至为密切,以致古今学者谈及二者关系时,无人能绕开“书画同源”这一宏论。然而,若细加思考,所谓书、画同源,或书出于画之说,的确给人以似是而非之感。因为这一说法的背后至少隐藏着两层误解,其一是“把两者本是艺术性格上的关联,误解为历史发生上的关联”~([1])。其二是在艺术性格的关联上又“把相得益彰的附益的关系,说成了因果卜的必然的关系。”~([2])由此,本文在探讨中国古代书画结合的关系问题时,并无心纠缠于谁先于谁、谁决定谁的问
Admittedly, in Chinese art, the relationship between calligraphy and painting is so close that when ancient and modern scholars talked about the relationship between the two, no one could bypass the macroeconomic theory of painting and calligraphy. However, if you think carefully, the so-called book, the homology, or the book is based on the painting, really gives the impression of right and wrong. Because there are at least two layers of misunderstandings hidden behind this argument. The first one is that “the two are art-related associations that are misunderstood as being related to history”. [1] The second is that in the connection of the artistic personality, “the relationship between the complementary benefits of complementarity is said to be the necessary relationship of causal”. [2] Therefore, this article discusses the relationship between ancient Chinese calligraphy and painting When the problem, there is no intention to struggle with who precedes who, who decided who asked