發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-08-02 21:29

【摘要】：基于審美自律與社會(huì)批判互構(gòu)的烏托邦傳統(tǒng),不少西方學(xué)者對(duì)藝術(shù)跨界持批評(píng)態(tài)度,對(duì)藝術(shù)跨界背景下的美學(xué)走向持悲觀態(tài)度。朗西埃通過反思利奧塔及其所代表的整個(gè)后現(xiàn)代"倫理轉(zhuǎn)向",試圖激活跨界藝術(shù)的政治潛力以重建美學(xué)的批判向度。然而,由于對(duì)"不可呈現(xiàn)者"與"不可再現(xiàn)者"的混淆,朗西埃沒有同情地理解利奧塔崇高美學(xué)所打開的感性學(xué)指向,其審美政治路線本身也存在一定局限。朗西埃"利奧塔批判"所呈顯的洞見與偏失,不僅有助于重審美學(xué)與藝術(shù)跨界的關(guān)系,亦有助于反省審美批判本身的合理性與適用邊界。
[Abstract]:Based on the Utopian tradition of aesthetic self-discipline and social criticism, many western scholars hold critical attitudes to the cross boundary of art and pessimistic attitude to the trend of aesthetics in the context of the cross boundary of art. By reflecting on Liotta and his post-modern "ethical turn", Lonsier tries to activate the political potential of cross-border art in order to reconstruct the critical aspect of aesthetics. However, because of the confusion between "the unpresentable" and "the unrepeatable", Lonsier did not understand sympathetically the perceptual point opened up by Liotta's noble aesthetics, and his aesthetic political line itself had its own limitations. Longsier's "Liotta critique" is not only helpful to re-examine the relationship between aesthetics and art, but also to reflect on the rationality and application boundary of aesthetic criticism itself.
【作者單位】： 南京大學(xué)文學(xué)院;
【分類號(hào)】：I01

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 劉瑋;;后現(xiàn)代主義大師利奧塔思想的內(nèi)在矛盾[J];江西社會(huì)科學(xué);2008年11期

2 楊小濱;;利奧塔:無中生有的美學(xué)[J];書城;2010年04期

3 王嘉軍;;藝術(shù)的異質(zhì)性及其對(duì)存在救贖之可能和限度——列維納斯對(duì)現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)的倫理定位兼談其與利奧塔美學(xué)思想之差異[J];文藝?yán)碚撗芯?2010年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 謝路路;利奧塔視角下中國(guó)當(dāng)代藝術(shù)敘事嬗變研究[D];山東師范大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：2160795