“藝術(shù)終結(jié)論”批判
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-13 12:15
【摘要】： 藝術(shù)終結(jié)的話題是伴隨西方現(xiàn)代化進(jìn)程而出現(xiàn)的話題。大約從18世紀(jì)開始,西方社會(huì)經(jīng)歷了從傳統(tǒng)到現(xiàn)代再到后現(xiàn)代的轉(zhuǎn)化。相應(yīng)地,西方藝術(shù)也經(jīng)歷了從傳統(tǒng)藝術(shù)到現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)再到后現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)的轉(zhuǎn)化。這樣,西方藝術(shù)的形態(tài)、意義以及地位就發(fā)生了三次歷史性轉(zhuǎn)折:即浪漫藝術(shù)、現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)、后現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)。這三次藝術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)折都引發(fā)了藝術(shù)終結(jié)的話題,黑格爾、阿多諾、丹托三人恰恰是這三種不同的藝術(shù)終結(jié)話題的標(biāo)示。黑格爾作為真正意義上的藝術(shù)終結(jié)始作俑者,阿多諾作為考察現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)的代表,丹托作為考察后現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)的榜樣。因此,本文就以這三個(gè)人的藝術(shù)終結(jié)思想作為研究的對(duì)象,希望梳理藝術(shù)終結(jié)理論內(nèi)涵的歷史演變,以有利于我們真正地認(rèn)識(shí)藝術(shù)活動(dòng)以及藝術(shù)與哲學(xué)、藝術(shù)與藝術(shù)史的關(guān)系。本文主要通過“歷史敘事”的方法,以“哲學(xué)—?dú)v史—藝術(shù)”有機(jī)統(tǒng)一的視角深入到黑格爾、阿多諾與丹托的具體語境及其文本來分析藝術(shù)終結(jié)的緣起與不同內(nèi)涵,并進(jìn)而給予批判性反思。本文共分四章對(duì)這個(gè)問題展開論述。 第一章主要研究黑格爾的藝術(shù)終結(jié)思想。就黑格爾來看,其“藝術(shù)終結(jié)”的提出有著自身的理論背景。黑格爾的思想以嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)而完備的體系性著稱,在求“真”的哲學(xué)演繹中,藝術(shù)最后被哲學(xué)所取代,從而引發(fā)藝術(shù)終結(jié)。透過黑格爾紛繁的藝術(shù)終結(jié)判詞,我們認(rèn)為其終結(jié)思想大致有這么三層意思:一、藝術(shù)之所以終結(jié),是因?yàn)樗辉偈切撵`的最高需要,它已經(jīng)轉(zhuǎn)移到宗教和哲學(xué)的觀念世界去了。二、伴隨古典型藝術(shù)向浪漫型藝術(shù)的過渡,黑格爾心目中的理想藝術(shù)被解體了。三、黑格爾認(rèn)為,現(xiàn)代市民社會(huì)帶來了種種不利于藝術(shù)發(fā)展的因素,因此藝術(shù)面臨著危機(jī),這種危機(jī)構(gòu)成了市民社會(huì)的一種表征。通過對(duì)這三個(gè)命題的闡釋,本文進(jìn)一步分析了黑格爾理論自身的內(nèi)在矛盾,從而指出,黑格爾的藝術(shù)終結(jié)并不表示藝術(shù)死亡,它只是表明了一種藝術(shù)困境,這種藝術(shù)困境正是人類生存困境的無意識(shí)的體現(xiàn)。 第二章主要研究阿多諾的藝術(shù)終結(jié)思想。對(duì)于阿多諾來說,他更多的是面對(duì)技術(shù)化、商業(yè)化帶來文化困境與藝術(shù)危機(jī)的語境下通過反思理性而進(jìn)一步提出藝術(shù)終結(jié)問題的。在阿多諾看來,作為承擔(dān)自由與批判責(zé)任的藝術(shù),此時(shí)卻隨著工具理性的不斷發(fā)展而處于兩極發(fā)展之中,一方面是伴隨各種新媒介不斷出現(xiàn)而催生的大眾文化的繁榮,另一方面是伴隨反抗異化而陷入表達(dá)危機(jī)的現(xiàn)代藝術(shù)的萎縮。面對(duì)這種藝術(shù)危機(jī),阿多諾認(rèn)為他那時(shí)的大眾藝術(shù)已經(jīng)被商品化,失去了藝術(shù)內(nèi)在的反抗與批判功能,于是對(duì)文化工業(yè)提出了批判。與此同時(shí),阿多諾寄希望于“反藝術(shù)”的藝術(shù)來進(jìn)行審美拯救。這二者某種程度上構(gòu)成了阿多諾藝術(shù)終結(jié)的話語表述。因此,阿多諾試圖通過一種更強(qiáng)的求“真”意識(shí)賦予危機(jī)中的藝術(shù)以前行的力量,不過這種“真”與黑格爾的“真”已不完全相同。 第三章主要研究丹托的藝術(shù)終結(jié)思想。丹托藝術(shù)終結(jié)論的提出與其對(duì)當(dāng)下藝術(shù)實(shí)踐的密切關(guān)注相聯(lián)系。20世紀(jì)60年代以來的藝術(shù)運(yùn)動(dòng)、藝術(shù)事件、藝術(shù)行為、藝術(shù)形式讓人不得不對(duì)“藝術(shù)是什么”重新進(jìn)行哲學(xué)反思。不過他與黑格爾從哲學(xué)出發(fā)推導(dǎo)出藝術(shù)終結(jié)相反,他則是從藝術(shù)現(xiàn)象學(xué)的角度發(fā)現(xiàn)藝術(shù)上升到哲學(xué)意識(shí),從而得出了藝術(shù)終結(jié)于哲學(xué)的結(jié)論。在丹托看來,哲學(xué)真理恢復(fù)自我意識(shí),標(biāo)志著西方藝術(shù)的宏大敘事的終結(jié),開辟了一個(gè)具決定性重要意義的轉(zhuǎn)向,開辟了對(duì)藝術(shù)理論的依賴,藝術(shù)現(xiàn)在成為對(duì)自身身份的哲學(xué)化認(rèn)知。這樣一來,丹托認(rèn)為藝術(shù)終結(jié)了,藝術(shù)史也終結(jié)了。不過,他認(rèn)為終結(jié)的只是一種藝術(shù)史的敘事方式,而不是藝術(shù)之死亡,因此藝術(shù)作品還會(huì)繼續(xù)存在,但已不具歷史方向和意義,藝術(shù)進(jìn)入了一個(gè)自由、平等、多元的時(shí)代。 第四章是在前面三章的討論基礎(chǔ)上對(duì)藝術(shù)終結(jié)話題的相關(guān)理論問題的進(jìn)一步描述與分析。其實(shí),盡管黑格爾、阿多諾、丹托的藝術(shù)終結(jié)的理論內(nèi)涵不同,但是都是立足于“藝術(shù)是什么”這個(gè)本質(zhì)主義的問題。也就是說,他們是在用“傳統(tǒng)”的藝術(shù)觀念不能回答“新”出現(xiàn)的藝術(shù)現(xiàn)象時(shí)提出了藝術(shù)終結(jié)。但是,如果我們從歷史敘事的視角來看,從藝術(shù)與哲學(xué)的關(guān)系史以及藝術(shù)概念演變史來把握藝術(shù)存在的深層機(jī)制的視角來看,藝術(shù)終結(jié)只不過是藝術(shù)危機(jī)的一種應(yīng)答方式而已。這種應(yīng)答方式其本身根本就不可能讓藝術(shù)死亡,而是導(dǎo)致了“反”傳統(tǒng)成為一種“新”傳統(tǒng),“反”藝術(shù)成為一種“新”藝術(shù),而這種“新”傳統(tǒng)與“新”藝術(shù)又逃不掉被“反”的命運(yùn)。從這種意義上講,非但藝術(shù)本身沒有終結(jié)(死亡),就連藝術(shù)終結(jié)論也不會(huì)終結(jié)。在藝術(shù)激變的時(shí)候,藝術(shù)終結(jié)論往往就可能又會(huì)出現(xiàn),但它恰恰是一種藝術(shù)繼續(xù)發(fā)展與前行的動(dòng)力和契機(jī)。人類不會(huì)消亡,歷史不會(huì)消亡,藝術(shù)本身就不會(huì)“終結(jié)”(消亡)。
[Abstract]:The topic of the end of art is a topic that emerges with the process of Western modernization. From about the 18th century, western society has undergone the transformation from tradition to modern and then to post-modern. Accordingly, western art has also undergone the transformation from traditional art to modern art and then to post-modern art. Hegel, Adorno and Danto are just the symbols of the three different topics of the end of art. Hegel, Adorno and Danto are the real founders of the end of art and Adorno are the actors of Adorno. Danto is an example of post-modern art when we study the representative of modern art. Therefore, this paper takes the thought of art termination of these three people as the object of study, hoping to sort out the historical evolution of the connotation of art termination theory, so as to help us truly understand the relationship between art activities, art and philosophy, art and art history. This paper analyzes the origin and different connotations of the end of art from the perspective of the organic unity of philosophy, history and art to the specific contexts and texts of Hegel, Adorno and Dento, and then gives a critical reflection.
The first chapter mainly studies Hegel's thought of artistic termination. From Hegel's point of view, his proposition of "artistic termination" has its own theoretical background. Hegel's thought is famous for its rigorous and complete system. In the philosophical deduction of seeking "truth", art is finally replaced by philosophy, thus triggering the end of art. The conclusion of art has three meanings: first, art has ended because it is no longer the supreme need of the soul, and has been transferred to the world of religious and philosophical ideas. Second, with the transition from classical art to romantic art, Hegel's ideal art has been disintegrated. Thirdly, Hegel holds that the modern civil society has brought about various factors that are not conducive to the development of art, so art is facing a crisis, which constitutes a symbol of civil society. Through the interpretation of these three propositions, this paper further analyzes the internal contradictions of Hegel's theory, thus pointing out that the end of Hegel's art is not. It means the death of art. It just shows a kind of art dilemma, which is the unconscious manifestation of human existence dilemma.
The second chapter mainly studies Adorno's thought of art termination. For Adorno, he puts forward the question of art termination in the context of Cultural Dilemma and art crisis caused by technicalization and commercialization. With the constant development of rationality, Adorno believes that popular art at that time has been commercialized and lost, because of the prosperity of mass culture accompanied by the emergence of various new media, and the atrophy of modern art which is in crisis of expression accompanied by resistance to alienation. At the same time, Adorno hopes to carry on the aesthetic salvation in the "anti-art" art. These two to some extent constitute Adorno's discourse expression of the end of art. The power of art before the machine, but this kind of "true" is not exactly the same as Hagel's "true".
The third chapter mainly studies Danto's thought of the end of art. Danto's conclusion of the end of art is related to his close attention to contemporary art practice. In Danto's view, philosophical truth restores self-consciousness, marking the end of the grand narrative of Western art and opening up a decisive turn of significance. Instead of relying on art theory, art is now a philosophical recognition of its identity. In this way, Danto believes that art is over and the history of art is over. Meaning, art has entered an era of freedom, equality and pluralism.
Chapter 4 is a further description and analysis of the relevant theoretical issues on the topic of art termination on the basis of the discussion in the previous three chapters. In fact, although Hegel, Adorno and Danto have different theoretical connotations of art termination, they are all based on the essentialism of what art is. "Art concept" can not answer the "new" artistic phenomena and puts forward the end of art. However, from the perspective of historical narration, from the perspective of the relationship between art and philosophy and the evolution of artistic concepts to grasp the deep mechanism of artistic existence, the end of art is only a response to the artistic crisis. This kind of reply can not make art die, but lead to the "anti" tradition become a "new" tradition, and "anti" art become a "new" art, and this "new" tradition and "new" art can not escape the fate of being "anti". In this sense, not only art itself has no end. End (death), even the conclusion of the end of art will not end. In the time of artistic change, the conclusion of the end of art will often appear, but it is precisely a kind of art continues to develop and move forward momentum and opportunity.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2008
【分類號(hào)】：J01
本文編號(hào)：2241148
[Abstract]:The topic of the end of art is a topic that emerges with the process of Western modernization. From about the 18th century, western society has undergone the transformation from tradition to modern and then to post-modern. Accordingly, western art has also undergone the transformation from traditional art to modern art and then to post-modern art. Hegel, Adorno and Danto are just the symbols of the three different topics of the end of art. Hegel, Adorno and Danto are the real founders of the end of art and Adorno are the actors of Adorno. Danto is an example of post-modern art when we study the representative of modern art. Therefore, this paper takes the thought of art termination of these three people as the object of study, hoping to sort out the historical evolution of the connotation of art termination theory, so as to help us truly understand the relationship between art activities, art and philosophy, art and art history. This paper analyzes the origin and different connotations of the end of art from the perspective of the organic unity of philosophy, history and art to the specific contexts and texts of Hegel, Adorno and Dento, and then gives a critical reflection.
The first chapter mainly studies Hegel's thought of artistic termination. From Hegel's point of view, his proposition of "artistic termination" has its own theoretical background. Hegel's thought is famous for its rigorous and complete system. In the philosophical deduction of seeking "truth", art is finally replaced by philosophy, thus triggering the end of art. The conclusion of art has three meanings: first, art has ended because it is no longer the supreme need of the soul, and has been transferred to the world of religious and philosophical ideas. Second, with the transition from classical art to romantic art, Hegel's ideal art has been disintegrated. Thirdly, Hegel holds that the modern civil society has brought about various factors that are not conducive to the development of art, so art is facing a crisis, which constitutes a symbol of civil society. Through the interpretation of these three propositions, this paper further analyzes the internal contradictions of Hegel's theory, thus pointing out that the end of Hegel's art is not. It means the death of art. It just shows a kind of art dilemma, which is the unconscious manifestation of human existence dilemma.
The second chapter mainly studies Adorno's thought of art termination. For Adorno, he puts forward the question of art termination in the context of Cultural Dilemma and art crisis caused by technicalization and commercialization. With the constant development of rationality, Adorno believes that popular art at that time has been commercialized and lost, because of the prosperity of mass culture accompanied by the emergence of various new media, and the atrophy of modern art which is in crisis of expression accompanied by resistance to alienation. At the same time, Adorno hopes to carry on the aesthetic salvation in the "anti-art" art. These two to some extent constitute Adorno's discourse expression of the end of art. The power of art before the machine, but this kind of "true" is not exactly the same as Hagel's "true".
The third chapter mainly studies Danto's thought of the end of art. Danto's conclusion of the end of art is related to his close attention to contemporary art practice. In Danto's view, philosophical truth restores self-consciousness, marking the end of the grand narrative of Western art and opening up a decisive turn of significance. Instead of relying on art theory, art is now a philosophical recognition of its identity. In this way, Danto believes that art is over and the history of art is over. Meaning, art has entered an era of freedom, equality and pluralism.
Chapter 4 is a further description and analysis of the relevant theoretical issues on the topic of art termination on the basis of the discussion in the previous three chapters. In fact, although Hegel, Adorno and Danto have different theoretical connotations of art termination, they are all based on the essentialism of what art is. "Art concept" can not answer the "new" artistic phenomena and puts forward the end of art. However, from the perspective of historical narration, from the perspective of the relationship between art and philosophy and the evolution of artistic concepts to grasp the deep mechanism of artistic existence, the end of art is only a response to the artistic crisis. This kind of reply can not make art die, but lead to the "anti" tradition become a "new" tradition, and "anti" art become a "new" art, and this "new" tradition and "new" art can not escape the fate of being "anti". In this sense, not only art itself has no end. End (death), even the conclusion of the end of art will not end. In the time of artistic change, the conclusion of the end of art will often appear, but it is precisely a kind of art continues to develop and move forward momentum and opportunity.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2008
【分類號(hào)】：J01
【引證文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條
1 江渝;張瑞利;;對(duì)藝術(shù)終結(jié)論與生活美學(xué)的深層反思[J];吉首大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年05期
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 李英宇;藝術(shù)觀念的演進(jìn)與變異[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2010年
，本文編號(hào)：2241148
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenyilunwen/yishull/2241148.html
最近更新
教材專著
