本文關鍵詞：審美自律性的歷史考察與反思　出處：《復旦大學》2009年博士論文　論文類型：學位論文

  更多相關文章： 自律 他律 現代性 審美現代性

【摘要】：審美自律性不是一個自明的概念,它歷史地生成并隨著時代美學思想的發(fā)展而不斷擴展其內涵;審美自律性也是一個現代美學概念,它隨著美學學科生成并成為審美現代性的一個重要觀念。當前關于審美自律性的探討大多在現代性的視域中展開,一方面審美自律性被當作文化現代性的確證,遭到了來自后現代理論的批判與解構;另一方面,審美自律性也體現了現代性概念的矛盾之處,即審美作為獨立的自治領域對表現為工具理性的啟蒙現代性有一種拒斥和批判功能。本文通過歷史地考察審美自律觀念的發(fā)展,梳理自律美學的理論資源,試圖通過歷史的和邏輯的分析來闡明自律性觀念的理論內涵和圍繞自律性所展開的話語碰撞。 論文第一章追溯了審美自律性思想的起源和奠基階段的相關美學理論。包括作為自律觀念源頭的英國經驗派美學的審美無利害思想,康德對自律美學的全面奠基和席勒對自律美學之自由維度的發(fā)展。 第二章審美自律觀念的發(fā)展,主要探討了十九世紀到二十世紀幾種典型的具有自律傾向的美學理論,包括叔本華的非功利的審美靜觀、克羅奇的直覺的審美感知方式和心理學派布洛的審美距離說以及敏斯特堡的審美孤立說。 第三章從美學理論轉向審美自律觀念在文學藝術創(chuàng)作和批評中的體現,討論了浪漫主義文學思潮中的自由和天才等觀念,唯美主義“為藝術而藝術”的創(chuàng)作思想,以及二十世紀以來強調審美形式和“文學性”的具有形式傾向的批評理論,包括英國形式主義、俄國形式主義和新批評派的美學與批評理論。 第四章討論的是具有現實批判傾向的審美自律理論,或者說半自律的自律論,即法蘭克福學派的阿多諾和馬爾庫塞的審美思想,通過對否定性、審美形式等獨特概念的再考察,探討了審美的自律性與藝術的批判功能相結合的可能性。 第五章討論了反審美自律的理論。審美自律性發(fā)展到極端形態(tài)所產生的要求絕對自律的無內容的形式主義、割裂與現實聯系的高雅藝術等,遭到了各種質疑和批評。這一章把當前對審美自律性的消解和批評歸結為三種理論路向,并集中探討了先鋒派理論、實用主義美學和布爾迪厄從社會學角度對審美自律性所做的批評和消解。 通過歷史考察,第六章總結了審美自律性的內涵,探討了審美自律性產生的社會歷史機制和文化背景;第七章在審美自律性問題的當下語境中展開,探討了審美自律性與現代性的關系、審美的現代性對啟蒙現代性的批判以及在當前語境中審美自律性的理論潛能。結語部分總結了對審美自律性的價值判斷:它是一個歷史的概念,又是一個邏輯范疇,同時又具有現實指向和當下性。
[Abstract]:Aesthetic self-discipline is not a self-evident concept, it has been generated historically and expanded its connotation with the development of the aesthetic thought of the times. Aesthetic self-discipline is also a modern aesthetic concept, which has become an important concept of aesthetic modernity with the emergence of aesthetic discipline. At present, the discussion of aesthetic self-discipline is mostly carried out from the perspective of modernity. On the one hand, aesthetic self-discipline is regarded as the confirmation of cultural modernity, which is criticized and deconstructed by postmodern theory. On the other hand, aesthetic self-discipline also reflects the contradiction of the concept of modernity. Aesthetic, as an independent autonomous field, has a function of rejecting and criticizing the enlightenment modernity, which is manifested as instrumental rationality. This paper reviews the development of aesthetic self-discipline concept and combs the theoretical resources of self-discipline aesthetics. This paper attempts to clarify the theoretical connotation of the concept of self-discipline and the discourse collision around the concept of self-discipline through historical and logical analysis. The first chapter traces the origin of aesthetic self-discipline and the relevant aesthetic theories in the foundation stage, including the aesthetic non-interest thought of the British empiricist aesthetics, which is the source of the self-discipline concept. Kant laid the foundation of self-discipline aesthetics and Schiller developed the freedom dimension of self-discipline aesthetics. The second chapter discusses the development of aesthetic self-discipline, mainly discusses several typical aesthetic theories with self-discipline tendency from 19th century to 20th century, including Schopenhauer's non-utilitarian aesthetic meditation. Crockett's intuitionistic aesthetic perception style, psychological school's aesthetic distance theory and Minstberg's aesthetic isolation theory. The third chapter, from aesthetic theory to aesthetic self-discipline in literary and artistic creation and criticism, discusses the romantic literary thoughts of freedom and genius and other concepts. Aestheticism "Art for the sake of Art", as well as the aesthetic form and "literary" emphasis on the form of criticism since 20th century, including British formalism. Russian formalism and the Aesthetics and critical Theory of Neo-criticism. Chapter 4th discusses the aesthetic self-discipline theory with realistic critical tendency, or semi-autonomous self-discipline theory, that is, the Frankfurt School of Adorno and Marcuse's aesthetic thoughts, through the negation. This paper discusses the possibility of the combination of aesthetic self-discipline and critical function of art. Chapter 5th discusses the theory of anti-aesthetic self-discipline. The development of aesthetic self-discipline to the extreme form of demand for absolute self-discipline of contentless formalism, separated from the reality of elegant art and so on. In this chapter, the dispel and criticism of aesthetic self-discipline is reduced to three theoretical directions, and the avant-garde theory is discussed in this chapter. Pragmatism Aesthetics and Bourdieu's criticism and deconstruction of Aesthetic Self-discipline from the Perspective of Sociology. Through historical investigation, chapter 6th summarizes the connotation of aesthetic self-discipline, discusses the social historical mechanism and cultural background of aesthetic self-discipline. Chapter 7th, in the current context of aesthetic self-discipline, explores the relationship between aesthetic self-discipline and modernity. Aesthetic modernity criticizes Enlightenment modernity and the theoretical potential of aesthetic self-discipline in the current context. The conclusion summarizes the value judgment of aesthetic self-discipline: it is a historical concept. It is also a logical category, at the same time, it has realistic direction and present nature.
【學位授予單位】：復旦大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：B83-0

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前3條

1 俞吾金;西方哲學發(fā)展中的三大轉向[J];河北學刊;2004年03期

2 陶東風;;文學的祛魅[J];文藝爭鳴;2006年01期

3 郭鐵成;;有關80年代文學評價及其它——就《文學的祛魅》與陶東風商榷[J];文藝爭鳴;2006年03期

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 呂宏波;十八世紀英國經驗派美學與“審美無利害”的起源[D];陜西師范大學;2005年

，

本文編號：1412591