论文部分内容阅读
20世纪美国最重要的艺术评论家克莱门特·格林伯格在他的《前卫与庸俗》中,谈及了现代前卫艺术(Avant-garde)所具有的纯粹性特征与革命的政治化倾向,同时谈及了庸俗艺术(Kitsch)被政治的利用。而在此存在着关于前卫艺术的双重悖论:其一,具有独立性的前卫艺术是关于艺术的艺术,具有艺术本身的独立性特征,然而却企图僭越其本有的界限,想要对政治产生影响,那么前卫艺术究竟是纯艺术还是激进的带有政治上左派倾向的艺术?其二,格林伯格认为前卫艺术的纯粹性使当时的法西斯主义与斯大林主义无法注入煽动性内容,而庸俗艺术却擅长此道,那么究竟是前卫艺术还是庸俗艺术带有政治上的革命性特征?本文企图通过对前卫艺术双重悖论的分析,回答前卫艺术的革命是否可能的问题。
Clement Greenberg, the most important art critic in the United States of the 20th century, in his Avant-Garde and vulgar talked about the pure features of modern avant-garde art and the politicized tendency of the revolution , Talking about the political exploitation of Kitsch. However, there is a double paradox on the avant-garde art. First, the avant-garde art with its own independence is about the art of art and has the independent character of art itself. However, Then whether the avant-garde art is pure art or radical art with a political leftist tendency? Second, Greenberg argues that the pureness of the avant-garde art made it impossible for Fascist and Stalinism to infiltrate seditious content with vulgarity Art is good at this, then what is avant-garde art or vulgar art with political revolutionary features? This article attempts to analyze the dual paradox of the avant-garde art, to answer the question whether the avant-garde revolution is possible.