为纽约画派代言?为理性主义代言?

• 作者： 毛秋月 ¹
• 作者单位：
• 提交时间：2024-10-09

摘要: 格林伯格对纽约画派的态度是复杂的，这源自于他对理性主义的坚持。在格林伯格看来，那些延续了现代主义自我批判之路的绘画才是好作品，而绘画中的哥特式想象和神秘原始元素不值得推崇。格林伯格的观点和同时期批评家罗森伯格的立场形成交锋，后者结合存在主义哲学对抽象表现主义中非理性的一面展开了论证。当代新艺术史学者迈克尔·莱杰则认为，格林伯格和罗森伯格的解读都有单一化的倾向，两人都没有很好地将文学性与理性综合考虑在内。时至今日，由格林伯格开启的现代主义论争仍在继续;直面现代主义批评文本，结合历史语境对其进行反思，是推进西方艺术史研究的题中应有之意。

Abstract: Greenberg's attitude towards the New York school is complicated,which stems from his insistence on rationalism. In Greenberg's view, paintingsthat follow the path of modernist self-criticism are good works, while the gothicimagination and mysterious primitive elements in the works are not worthy ofpraise. (reenberg's reverence for reason clashed with that of his contemporary criticRosenberg, who combined existentialist philosophy to demonstrate the irrationalside of Abstract Expressionism, Michael Leja, a contemporary scholar of New ArtHistory studies, argues that both Greenberg's and Rosenberg's interpretations areunitary and fail to take a comprehensive consideration of literariness and rationality.The modernist debate that greenberg started continues. Today, facing up to the textsof modernist criticism and reflecting on it in the context of social history is a properway to promote the study ofwestern art history.

• 分类： 艺术学 >> 美术与书法
• 稿件状态： 已在期刊出版
期刊名称： 《当代美术家》 2020年 第3期
• 引用： PSSXiv:202410.02593 (或此版本 PSSXiv:202410.02593V1)
  DOI:10.12451/202410.02593
  CSTR:32012.36.PSSXiv.202410.02593
• 推荐引用方式： 毛秋月.为纽约画派代言?为理性主义代言?.当代美术家,2020(3).[PSSXiv:202410.02593V1] (点此复制)