超越“语-图”之辩——论T. J. 克拉克《瞥见死神》的写作试验

文艺理论研究 ›› 2017, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (3): 149-155.

超越“语-图”之辩——论T. J. 克拉克《瞥见死神》的写作试验

诸葛沂

杭州师范大学美术学院

出版日期:2017-05-25 发布日期:2018-01-24
作者简介:诸葛沂，博士，杭州师范大学美术学院副教授。主要从事西方艺术史、艺术哲学和艺术批评研究。

Transcending the "Word-Image" Debate: the Writing Experiment of T. J. Clark's The Sight of Death

Zhuge Yi

Western art history, art theory and art criticism at Hangzhou Normal University (Hangzhou 310011, China)

Online:2017-05-25 Published:2018-01-24
About author:Zhuge Yi, Ph.D., is an associate professor of Western art history, art theory and art criticism at Hangzhou Normal University (Hangzhou 310011, China).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： “语-图”关系认知是西方现代美学的重要问题，也是导致艺术史与艺术批评写作分野的界碑之一。一些学者认为，艺术作品可以被化约为语言；另一些则不同意。艺术写作在这种二元论之间振荡，且出现了一些试图超越“语-图”之辩的理论探索。T. J. 克拉克在《瞥见死神：艺术写作的一次试验》中采用了日记体与弱化语言强势的表达，记录了自己对普桑画作的每日静观和深刻体验，字里行间体现出对绘画之物质性品质的重视。这一写作试验，既实现了“语-图”之争的和解，达到了艺术与语言的共鸣；又从根本上对那种脱离社会现实，忽略图像静观，标榜新颖理论，沦陷于不断膨胀的资本主义总体性及文化工业的“异化”的艺术写作现状，进行了批判，具有发人深省的意义。

关键词: T. J. 克拉克, 普桑, “语-图”之辩, 艺术写作

Abstract: The "word-image" relationship is an important subject of modern Western aesthetics. It represents the division between the writing of art history and that of art criticism. The bone of contention between the two writing camps is whether the art work can be reducible to words. Art writings vibrate between this dualism, and some try to transcend the "word-image" division in theory. In his The Sight of Death: An Experiment in Art Writing, T. J. Clark, by adopting the diary style without a strong style of language, recorded his daily viewing of Poussin's paintings and his deep contemplations. He stresses the materiality of painting, which the viewers should pay attention to. The writing experiment makes possible a peaceable settlement of the "word-image" disputes, and the resonance between art and language. Basically, such an experiment criticizes the present situation of art writing, which is divorced from social realities, neglecting image quality and visual analysis, and flaunting new theory, and is reduced to the "alienation" caused by capitalist totality and cultural industry.

Key words: T. J. Clark, Nicolas Poussin, "word-image", art writing

诸葛沂. 超越“语-图”之辩——论T. J. 克拉克《瞥见死神》的写作试验[J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(3): 149-155.

Zhuge Yi. Transcending the "Word-Image" Debate: the Writing Experiment of T. J. Clark's The Sight of Death[J]. Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art, 2017, 37(3): 149-155.

Bois,Yve-Alain and Rosalind E.Kraus.Formless:A User's Guide.New York:Zone Books,1997.
Clark,T.J..“Balancing Act(letter to the editor).”Art Forum International 45:8(April 2007),42.
T.J.克拉克:《瞥见死神:艺术写作的一次试验》,张雷译。南京:江苏美术出版社,2012。[Clark,T.J..The Sight of Death.An Experiment in Art Writing.Trans.Zhang Lei,Nanjing:Jiangsu Fine Arts Publishing House,2012.]
Dyke,James A.van.“Modernist Poussin.”Oxford Art Journal.Volume 31,issue 2,(2)2008:285-92.
Eagleton,Terry.The Ideology of the Aesthetic.Oxford:Blackwell,1990.
Greenberg,Clement.The Collected Essays and Criticism,vol.4.Ed.John O'Brian,Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1993.
贡布里希:《象征的图像---贡布里希图像学文集》,杨思梁、范景中编选。上海:上海书画出版社,1990。[Gombrich,E.H..The Image of Symbolism:Collected Papers of Gombrich's Iconology.Eds.Yang Siliang and Fan Jingzhong.Shanghai:Shanghai Fine Arts Publisher,1990.]
郭伟:“‘语-图’关系认知考辨”,《武汉科技大学学报(社会科学版)》3(2013):340-48。[Guo,Wei.“An Examination of the‘Word-Image’Relationship.”Journal of Wuhan University of Science and Technology(Social Science Edition)3(2013):340-48.]
Hills,Helen.“The Uses of Images:W.G.Sebald&T.J.Clark.”Melilah:Manchester Journal of Jewish Studies.(2)2012(Supplement):57-80.
Iversen,Margaret and Stephen Melville.Writing Art History:Disciplinary Departures.Chicago and London:University of Chicago Press,2010.
Phillips,Adam.“What do you think you're looking at?”The Observer magazine,Saturday 12 August 2006〈http://www.theguardian.com/books/2006/aug/13/art〉.
苏珊·桑塔格:《反对阐释》,程巍译。上海:上海译文出版社,2003年。[Sontag,Susan.Against Interpretation.Tran.Cheng Wei,Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House,2003.]
(1)比如,在著名的立体主义论文集《毕加索和勃洛克:一次研讨会》中便收有这两位的文章。请参见William Stanley Rubin,Kirk Varnedoe,and Lynn Zelevansky,eds..Picasso and Braque:A Symposium.Museum of Modern Art,Distributed by H.N.Abrams,New York,NY,1992.
(2)巴塔耶曾经概述过他所指的“无形式”的内涵:“非形(informe)不仅是一种具有某种现成意义的形容词,而且是一个可以给这个世界带来些什么的词汇,(而这个世界上的)任何东西都有自己的形式。”参见George Bataille,“Informe,”in Documents 1:7,1929,translated in Bataille,Visions of Excess:Selected Writings,1927-1939.Minneapolis,University of Minnesota Press,p.31.此处参考了邵亦杨,“形式和反形式:视觉文化中的形与无形”文中的引译,《美术研究》4(2007)。
(3)参见T.J.Clark.“Phenomenality and Materiality in Cézanne”,in Cohen et al.(eds.),Material Events:Paul de Man and the Afterlife of Theory.(Minneapolis,MN and London:University of Minnesota Press,2001),pp.93-113.及T.J.Clark.“Freud's Cézanne”,Representations 52,1995,pp.94-122.
(4)这一类的书很多,如Sheila McT ighe.Nicolas Poussin's Landscape Allegories(Cambridge University Press:Cambridge,1996);Judith Bernstock.Poussin and French Dynastic Ideology(Peter Lang:Frankfurt,2000);and Todd P.Olson.Poussin and France:Painting,Humanism,and the Politics of Style(Yale University Press:New Haven,CT,2002).
(5)而这种失望,正是阿瑟·丹托在读了《瞥见死神》后的失望。参Arthur C.Danto.“A serpent's tale:Arthur C.Danto on T.J.Clark”,Artforum International,Feb 1,2007.
(6)克拉克对伯瓦和克劳斯所运用的符号学研究方法曾有过非常强烈的批评。具体参见T.J.Clark.Farewell to an Idea:Episodes from a History of Modernism(Yale University Press:New Haven,CT,1999),p.169.
(7)克拉克与格林伯格、迈克尔·弗雷德之间针对现代主义的论战,已经成为现代主义研究史上的一段公案,参张晓剑,“论弗雷德与克拉克的现代主义之争”,《文艺研究》5(2013),第104-109页;诸葛沂,“论德·迪弗对‘现代主义之争’的甄辨与调和”,《文艺研究》5(2015),第25-32页。
(8)克拉克深受情境主义思想影响,他对晚期资本主义景观社会的批评,请参见其以化名发表的Retort.“Afflicted Powers:The State,the Spectacle and September 11”,New Left Review,vol.27,May-June 2004,pp.5-21;及Retort.Afflicted Powers:Capital and Spectacle in a New Age of War(Verso:London,2005).Retort是位于旧金山的一个拥有3、40名会员的社会反对者团体的集体化名,克拉克是其中的骨干作者。

[1]	王欣. 惰性、凝神与沉默——尼古拉·普桑《里纳尔多与阿米达》的三重奥秘 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2023, 43(3): 42-49.
[2]	李昊阳. T. J. 克拉克的“否定”逻辑与社会艺术史的逆向实践 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2021, 41(3): 146-156.
[3]	沈语冰. 是政治，还是美学？——T. J. 克拉克的艺术社会史观 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2012, 32(3): 12-16.