托马斯·克洛与文化研究视域中的前卫艺术理论

文艺理论研究 ›› 2024, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (3): 131-140.

托马斯·克洛与文化研究视域中的前卫艺术理论

蒋苇

出版日期:2024-05-25 发布日期:2024-07-16
作者简介:蒋苇,美学博士,华东理工大学艺术设计与传媒学院讲师,主要从事现当代艺术史及艺术批评研究。
基金资助:
教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“文化研究视域中的艺术批评——基于托马斯·克洛的研究”[项目编号:21YJC760033]、上海市设计学IV类高峰学科资助项目、华东理工大学高校基本科研业务费专项基金[项目编号:JKZ01212203]的阶段性成果。

Thomas Crow and Avant-garde Theory from a Cultural Studies Perspective

Jiang Wei

Online:2024-05-25 Published:2024-07-16
About author:Jiang Wei, Ph.D., is a lecturer in the School of Art Design and Media, East China University of Science and Technology. Her research interests include modern and contemporary art history and art criticism.
Supported by:
Humanity and Social Sciences Youth Foundation of Ministry of Education (21YJC760033), Shanghai Summit Discipline Project of Design (Category IV), and the Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities, ECUST (JKZ01212203).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 对文化工业的批判是从法兰克福学派到《十月》学派艺术理论的核心立场之一。尽管对精英主义的反驳和修正早已为大众文化正名,理论界却没有形成与大众文化“和解”的前卫艺术理解范式。托马斯·克洛吸收了文化研究的思想,认为大众文化自身就包含潜在的批判性,前卫艺术通过对大众文化资源的择取调用,在形成新的艺术解决方案的同时,实现社会批判的隐射。克洛重新界定了“前卫艺术”的概念,使一种能容纳大众文化的前卫艺术历史叙事成为可能。相较于布赫洛与福斯特重返批判理论的“对抗”范式,他通过揭示艺术与大众文化之间动态协作的张力关系为新前卫艺术辩护。这一辩证的关系模式与多元主义与乌托邦主义都拉开了距离,将前卫艺术理论引向协作与竞争的现实之维。

关键词: 前卫艺术, 大众文化, 托马斯·克洛, 文化研究, 《十月》学派

Abstract: The hostility of aesthetic modernism to mass culture has been a central position in avant-garde theory from the Frankfurt School to the October Group. Although mass culture has already been rehabilitated through a re-evaluation and critique of modernism, no avant-garde theory has achieved reconciliation with mass culture. Inspired by cultural studies theories, Thomas Crow argues that potential criticality is already embodied in mass culture and that, by appropriating it, avant-garde art can offer new solutions to art while expressing an implicit social critique. Crow re-defines the concept of the “avant-garde” to allow for a historical narrative that makes room for mass culture. On one hand, while the October Group returns to the oppositional mode of critical aesthetics, Crow defends neo-avant-garde art by revealing the tension and dynamic cooperative relationship between high art and mass culture. On the other hand, this dialectical relationship has led the Utopian avant-garde theory to embrace the realistic dimension of cooperation and competence.

Key words: avant-garde art, mass culture, Thomas Crow, cultural studies, the October Group

蒋苇. 托马斯·克洛与文化研究视域中的前卫艺术理论[J]. 文艺理论研究, 2024, 44(3): 131-140.

Jiang Wei. Thomas Crow and Avant-garde Theory from a Cultural Studies Perspective[J]. Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art, 2024, 44(3): 131-140.

本雅明·布赫洛:《新前卫与文化工业》,何卫华、史岩林译。南京:江苏凤凰美术出版社,2014年。
[Buchloh, Benjamin. Neo-Avantgarde and Cultural Industry. Trans. He Weihua and Shi Yanlin. Nanjing: Jiangsu Phoenix Fine Arts Publishing House, 2014.]
——:《第二次的原色——新前卫的范式重复》,《20世纪西方艺术批评文选》,沈语冰、张晓剑主编。石家庄:河北美术出版社,2018年。314—320。
[---. “The Primary Colors for the Second Time: A Paradigm Repetition of the Neo-Avant-Garde.” Selected Essays of Twentieth-Century Western Art Criticism. Eds. Shen Yubing and Zhang Xiaojian. Shijiazhuang: Hebei Fine Arts Publishing House, 2018.314320.]
——:《19621969的概念艺术:从管理美学到体制批评》,《20世纪西方艺术批评文选》,沈语冰、张晓剑主编。石家庄:河北美术出版社,2018年。154—176。
[---. “Conceptual Art 19621969: From the Aesthetic of Administration to the Critique of Institutions.” Selected Essays of Twentieth-Century Western Art Criticism. Shijiazhuang: Hebei Fine Arts Publishing House, 2018.154176.]
Buchloh, Benjamin. Neo-Avantgarde and Cultural Industry. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2000.
---. “The Social History of Art: Models and Concepts.” Art Since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism, Postmodernism. Eds. Rosalind Krauss and Hal Foster, et al. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd, 2016.2433.
---. “Conceptual Art 19621969: From the Aesthetic of Administration to the Critique of Institutions.” October 55(1990):105143.
马泰·卡林内斯库:《现代性的五副面孔》,顾爱彬、李瑞华译。南京:译林出版社,2015年。
Calinescu, Matei. Five Faces of Modernity. Trans. Gu Aibin and Li Ruihua. Nanjing: Yilin Press, 2015.
Crimp, Douglas. “Getting the Warhol We Deserve: Culture Studies and Queer Culture.” Social Text 59(1999):4966.
Crow, Thomas. “Modernism and Mass Culture in the Visual Arts.” Modern Art in the Common Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.337.
---. “Saturday Disasters: Trace and Reference in Early Warhol.” Modern Art in the Common Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.4965.
---. “Site-Specific Art: The Strong and The Weak.” Modern Art in the Common Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.131150.
托马斯·克洛:《60年代的兴起:异见时代的美国与欧洲艺术》,蒋苇、邓天媛译。南京:江苏凤凰美术出版社,2020年。
[---. The Rise of the Sixties: American and European Art in the Era of Dissent. Trans. Jiang Wei and Deng Tianyuan. Nanjing: Jiangsu Phoenix Fine Arts Publishing House, 2004.]
Danto, Arthur Coleman. After The End of Art: Contemporary Art and the Pale of History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.
哈尔·福斯特:《实在的回归》,杨娟娟译。南京:凤凰美术出版社,2015年。
[Foster, Hal. The Return of the Real. Trans. Yang Juanjuan. Nanjing: Jiangsu Phoenix Fine Arts Publishing House, 1996.]
Glueck, Grace. “Clashing Views Reshape Art History.” New York Times. 20 Dec.1987: section 2,1.
克莱门特·格林伯格:《现代主义绘画》,周宪译,《世界美术》3(1992):50—52,40。
[Greenberg, Clement. “Modernistic Painting.” Trans. Zhou Xian. World Art 3(1992):5052,40.]
——:《艺术与文化》,沈语冰译。桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2009年。
[---. Art and Culture. Trans. Shen Yubing. Guilin: Guangxi Normal University Press, 2009.
Hall, Stuart, and Tony Jefferson. Resistance through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-War Britain. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003.
乔治·库布勒:《时间的形状》,郭伟其译。北京:商务印书馆,2019年。
[Kubler, George. The Shape of Time. Trans. Guo Weiqi. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2019.]
---. The Shape of Time. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970.
鲁明军:《前卫的承诺:〈十月〉访谈录》。上海:东方出版中心,2023年。
[Lu, Mingjun. The Commitment of the Avant-garde: Interviews with October. Shanghai: Orient Publishing Center, 2023.]
Podro, Michael. The Critical Historians of Art. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982.
迈耶·夏皮罗:《抽象艺术的性质》,《现代艺术:19与20世纪》,沈语冰译。南京:凤凰美术出版社,2015年。227—253。
[Schapiro, Meyer. “The Nature of Abstract Art.” Modern Art, 19^th & 20^th Centuries: Selected Papers. Trans. Shen Yubing. Nanjing: Jiangsu Phoenix Fine Arts Publishing House, 2015.227253.]
Schapiro, Meyer. “The Nature of Abstract Art.” Modern Art, 19^th & 20^th Centuries: Selected Papers. New York: George Braziller, 1982.185212.
约亨·舒尔特扎赛:《现代主义理论还是先锋派理论》。彼得·比格尔:《先锋派理论》,高建平译。北京:商务印书馆,2017年。1—52。
[Schulte-Sasse, Jochen. “Theory of Modernism versus Theory of the Avant-Garde.” Peter Burger. Theory of the Avant-Garde. Trans. Gao Jianping. Beijing: The Commercial Press, 2017.152.]
杨娟娟:《重构后现代主义艺术批评:反多元主义与多元主义之争》,《文艺理论研究》1(2021):198—207。
[Yang, Juanjuan. “Recoding Postmodernist Art Criticism: The Debate between Anti-Pluralism and Pluralism.” Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art 1(2021):198207.]
赵勇:《法兰克福学派内外》。北京:北京大学出版社,2016年。
[Zhao, Yong. The Inside and the Outside of the Frankfurt School. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2016.]

[1]	赵炎秋. 文艺大众化运动与其发展和转型 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2024, 44(3): 1-12.
[2]	程相占, 张金娟. 文化研究与美学:理论分野及对话交融 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2023, 43(5): 72-82.
[3]	王宁. 雷蒙德·威廉斯之于当今文学和文化研究的意义 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(6): 20-29.
[4]	勾彦殳. 虚拟异托邦：论当代大众文化的受众快感机制及其接受效果 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(4): 43-51.
[5]	李石. 文化研究与美国华人学者的知识谱系——从刘禾的“国民性”争议谈起 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2021, 41(5): 207-216.
[6]	杨东篱. 接合理论与文化研究的演进 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2021, 41(3): 54-64.
[7]	张聪, 赵冰. 文化研究的回望与重访：约翰·斯道雷教授访谈 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2020, 40(5): 156-167.
[8]	李雷. 前卫艺术介入社会的形式、路径及其限度 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2020, 40(2): 57-67.
[9]	周志强. 紧迫性幻觉与文化研究的未来——近30年中国大陆之文化研究与文化批评 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(5): 86-96.
[10]	李艳丰. 重返葛兰西：文化政治的理论溯源与文化研究的葛兰西转向 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(5): 152-161.
[11]	陈国战. 折返的寻梦之旅——1990年代以来中国大众文化中的美国叙事 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(4): 196-205.
[12]	姚文放. “症候解读”的理论谱系与文学归趋 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(2): 118-128.
[13]	李松. 哈佛版《新美国文学史》的后现代主义文学史观及其反思 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2016, 36(1): 201-208.
[14]	阎嘉. 如何理解文化研究的跨学科性：以霍加特《识字的用途》为例 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2015, 35(2): 154-162.
[15]	张瑞卿. F. R.利维斯与文化研究——从利维斯到霍加特，再到威廉斯 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2015, 35(1): 205-214.