夏皮罗的艺术符号学——在文艺研究符号学范式变革的语境下

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 一场符号学所带来的理论范式变革在20世纪席卷了几乎从人类学、文学理论到艺术史的所有人文学科。这一变革起初在于丰富文艺研究的方法，提高其理论化程度，但是在发展中却逐渐演变成以牺牲文艺作品的审美魅力为代价、排他性地关注文学与艺术的伦理和政治作用的一种大写理论（Theory）。而美国艺术史家迈耶·夏皮罗的实践在为传统艺术史研究引入符号学方法的同时却避免了这一危险：一方面符号学的引入让我们摆脱了本质论或形而上学的断言，让分析变得更丰富、细致，有更多可能性；另一方面，图像-符号的符号学基础打破了形式主义的“无意义说”和“纯形式论”，建构了从再现艺术到抽象艺术在图像学意义上的可理解性。符号学的引入并不代表我们要放弃对艺术的形式与审美品质的分析。

关键词: 夏皮罗, 符号学, 图像学, 意义, 形式

Abstract: During the 20th century, a theory transformation brought about by semiotics has inserted profound impact on almost all the disciplines of humanities, including anthropology, literary theory and art history. Starting with the aim at theorizing these studies, the movement has evolved into a capitalized Theory during its development that shifts its focuses to the ethical and political functions of literature and art and sacrifices the aesthetic values of literary texts. When Meyer Schapiro introduced semiotic methods into his art history studies, he could avoid the hazard. His introduction of semiotics into art history study, by bypassing the essentialist or metaphysical claims, enriches and opens more alternatives in the analysis of artworks. Due to its foundation on the image-sign semiotics, it could also overpass the notion of meaninglessness of artworks and the idea of pure form, so that the iconological intelligibility from representational art to abstract art can be constructed. The introduction of semiotics into the study of art does not, however, mean to give up analyzing the aesthetic qualities and the formal aspects of artworks.

Key words: Meyer Schapiro, semiotics, iconology, meaning, form

高薪. 夏皮罗的艺术符号学——在文艺研究符号学范式变革的语境下[J]. 文艺理论研究, 2015, 35(2): 180-188.

Gao Xin. Schapiro, Semiotics and Iconography[J]. Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art, 2015, 35(2): 180-188.

Ackerman, James T.. “On American Scholarship in the Arts.” College Art Journal 4 (1958): 357-62.
朱里奥·阿根：“艺术的历史性与艺术史”，周宪译，《世界美术》2（2004）：74-77。
[Argan, Giulio. “The Historicity of Art and Art History.” Trans. Zhou Xian. World Art 2 (2004): 74-77.]
米克·巴尔：“观看符号∕解读绘画——运用符号学理解视觉艺术”，常宁生译，《世界美术》1（2007）：90-100。
[Bal, Mieke. “See Signs: The Use of Semiotics for the Understanding of Visual Art.” Trans. Chang Ningsheng. World Art 1 (2007): 90-100.]
Bal, Mieke, Alain Bois, Griselda Pollock, and Christopher Wood. “Art History and Its Theories.” The Art Bulletin 1 (1996): 6-25.
Bal, Mieke, and Norman Bryson. “Semiotics and Art History.” The Art Bulletin 2 (1991): 174-208.
Clark, Micheal. Revenge of the Aesthetic. The Place of Literature in Theory Today. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000.
乔纳森·卡勒：“当今的文学理论”，《外国文学研究》4（2012）：49-62。
[Culler, Jonathan. “Literary Theory Today.” Foreign Literature Studies 4 (2012): 49-62.]
Holly, Michael Ann. “Schapiro Style.” The Journal of Aesthetic and Art Criticism 1 (1997): 6-10.
Krieger, Murray. “My Travel with the Aesthetic.” Revenge of the Aesthetic. The Place of Literature in Theory Today. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000.
Muka?ovský, Jan. “Art as a Semiotic Fact.” Structure, Sign, and Function. Trans. John Burbank and Peter Steiner. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1978.
Murray, Chris, ed. Key Writers on Art: The Twentieth Century. London and New York: Routledge, 2003.
吉拉托·莫斯昆拉等：“迈耶·夏皮罗：马克思主义与抽象艺术”，易英译，《世界美术》3（1998）：42-45。
[Mosquera, Gerardo, et al. “Meyer Schapiro: Marxist Aesthetics and Abstract Art.” Trans. Yi Ying. World Art 3 (1998): 42-45.]
Panofsky, Erwin. Studies in Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972.
雅克·朗希埃：《图像的命运》，张新木陆洵译。南京：南京大学出版社，2014年。
[Rancière, Jacques. The Future of the Image. Trans. Zhang Xinmu and Lu Xun. Nanjing: Nanjing University Press, 2014.]
Schapiro, Meyer. Late Antique, Early Christian and Medieval Art: Selected Papers. New York: George Braziller, 1979.
----. Moder Art, 19th and 20th Centuries. New York: George Braziller, 1979.
----. Theory and Philosophy of Art: Style, Artist, and Society. New York: George Braziller, 1994.
----. Words, Script, and Pictures: Semiotics of Visual Language. New York: George Braziller, 1996.
Wellek, Rene. “Destroying Literary Studies.” Theory’s Empire: An Anthology of Dissent. Eds. Daphne Patal and Will Corral. New York and Chichester: Columbia University Press, 2005.

[1]	程波, 袁海燕. 电影作为感知物与时间形式 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2023, 43(2): 108-117.
[2]	余敏. 论有偿写作的困境与纾解——以元好问散文创作为中心 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2023, 43(1): 196-205.
[3]	陈建森, 陈颖姮. “说书场交流语境”与宋元话本的文本形式 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(6): 153-164.
[4]	赵禹平. 指示与元叙述：真人真事改编电影的双层叙述 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(5): 112-121.
[5]	代亮. 归有光寿序经典地位的确立及其文学史意义 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(4): 144-152.
[6]	冯伟. 从符号学到现象学：欧美剧场表演研究基本方法的确立 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(3): 128-137.
[7]	石可. 论剧场性 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(3): 139-151.
[8]	李牧. 反艺术还原论：论保罗·克劳瑟的后分析现象学美学及其延伸 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(2): 85-96.
[9]	安静. 从符号化的意向性通向艺术符号学的哲学向度：归纳认知视域下的赝品问题再探 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(2): 137-145.
[10]	张巧. 论戴维森实用主义文论的三副面孔 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(2): 146-155.
[11]	谭光辉. “厌恶”的情感符号分析及其社会、审美功能 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2021, 41(5): 148-156.
[12]	吴飞. 在文本前理解自己——保罗·利科的文本意义观念#br# [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2021, 41(5): 176-183.
[13]	徐燕婷. 民国中后期女性词的苏辛词风转向及其词史意义 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2021, 41(3): 210-218.
[14]	南帆. 大众文艺、民族形式与抒情的重现 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2021, 41(2): 1-15.
[15]	戴登云. 转换生成：文学言说的动力机制——“耶鲁学派”语言诗学管窥之二 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2020, 40(6): 127-135.

夏皮罗的艺术符号学——在文艺研究符号学范式变革的语境下

Schapiro, Semiotics and Iconography

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

相关文章 15

在文本前理解自己——保罗·利科的文本意义观念#br#

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价