唐寅文人风格的山水画考

发布时间：2018-03-04 21:02

本文选题：唐寅　切入点：文人画　出处：《南京大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：唐寅是一名兼善行、利的文人画家,本文首次明确将其山水题材的画作分成了“院体画”与“文人画”两种风格,又总结出其文人画风格的山水画的特征,综合这些特征,运用考订、比对、笔墨分析等方法,以进行唐寅其他文人画风格的山水画的个案研究及鉴定。本文分为六章,第一章介绍了目前关于唐寅山水画研究和鉴定的论著,并阐述了本文的研究方法。第二章首先从存世的唐寅作品中排除那些令人质疑的作品,选取唐寅书法和绘画的代表作进行具体分析,总结其师承渊源,并按年代将这些书法和绘画的代表作各分成早中晚三个时期,梳理出唐寅书画变化发展的面貌,归纳其各个时期的风格特点,从而以这些代表作和风格特点作为唐寅绘画个案研究的基础及参照基准。第三章,例举画史资料,发现唐寅在隶属南北宗或是行利家的问题上一直受到争议,本章肯定了唐寅文人画家的身份,论述其总体来说并不属于“吴门画派”,其次对于唐寅的画不能一概而论,要具体分析他不同面貌的作品才能准确地进行评价和研究,因而依据其山水画的面貌和创作意图的不同,将之分为“院体画”和“文人画”两种风格,认为“院体画”是主学南宋院体风格,绘制工整,多作于绢本上且用于售卖,而“文人画”则承继元人笔墨的意味,多作于纸本上用于文人唱和的,另外本章列举了唐寅文人风格山水画的代表作品,归纳其共性,这些共性也将作为鉴定唐寅同类其他画作的基本参考和依据。第四章则用上文总结的唐寅文人风格的山水画的共性,来检验传为唐寅早期所作的《黄茅小景图》图,分析和比对了其笔墨皴法后,发现与唐寅真迹有别,卷后的书法题跋也不符合诸家面目,考订其著录流传后,发现了三本著录存在的问题,进而认为可能存在着真伪两本《黄茅小景图》,从而质疑此图可能不是唐寅的亲笔原迹,而是伪本。第五章、第六章,仍然以唐寅文人画之特征继续检验传为唐寅的《王鏊出山图》、《沛台实景图》、《暮春林壑图》、《关山行旅图》、《观梅图》、《空山长啸图》,同时也从这些画的题跋、著录等方面进行考察,最后得出这些画的笔墨皴法与唐寅的标准作品差距过大,疑似伪作的结论。在前人研究的基础上,本文纠正了以往对唐寅书画研究的一些谬误,重新确定了唐寅可作为参考标准的代表作品并加以分期,厘清了唐寅书画艺术的发展过程,将一直受到争议的唐寅山水画作品分为两种风格,并重点总结出了其文人风格山水画的共性和特征,进而将所总结的理论尝试用于实践,即以之检验了几幅传为唐寅的作品,最后提出了质疑,以有益于唐寅书画的鉴定。
[Abstract]:Tang Yin is a literati painter with good deeds and good deeds. This paper categorizes his paintings of landscape theme into two styles: "Yuan style painting" and "literati painting" for the first time, sums up the characteristics of his literati painting style and synthesizes these characteristics. This paper is divided into six chapters, the first chapter introduces the current works on the research and appraisal of Tang Yin's landscape painting, using the methods of examination, comparison, stroke and ink analysis, and so on, in order to carry out the case study and appraisal of Tang Yin's other literati painting styles, this paper is divided into six chapters, the first chapter introduces the current works about Tang Yin's landscape painting research and appraisal. In the second chapter, we exclude the questionable works from the existing Tang Yin's works, select the representative works of Tang Yin's calligraphy and painting for specific analysis, and sum up their origins. The representative works of these calligraphy and painting are divided into three periods according to the time, such as early, middle and late, to sort out the changing features of Tang Yin's calligraphy and painting, and to sum up the style characteristics of each period. Thus, these representative works and style characteristics are taken as the basis and reference for Tang Yin's painting case study. Chapter three, illustrating the history of painting, finds that Tang Yin has been controversial on the issue of belonging to the North and South sect or the Xingli Family. This chapter affirms the identity of Tang Yin literati painter, and discusses that it does not belong to "Wu Men painting School" in general. Secondly, Tang Yin's paintings cannot be generalized. Only by analyzing his works with different features can he accurately evaluate and study them. Therefore, according to the different features and creative intentions of its landscape paintings, it is divided into two styles: "Yuan style painting" and "literati painting". It is considered that "Yuan style painting" is the main style of the Southern Song Dynasty, drawing neat, mostly made on silk and used for sale. "Literati painting" inherits the meaning of the pen and ink of the Yuan Dynasty and is mostly used in the paper for the literati to sing. In addition, this chapter enumerates the representative works of Tang Yin's literati style and landscape painting, and sums up its generality. These commonalities will also be used as the basic reference and basis for the appraisal of Tang Yin's similar other paintings. Chapter 4th uses the similarities of Tang Yin's literati style landscape paintings as summarized above to test the "Huang Mao scene map", which was passed down to Tang Yin's early days. After analyzing and comparing the method of brushwork and ink chapping, it is found that it is different from Tang Yin's true handwriting, and the calligraphy inscriptions and postscript behind the scroll do not accord with the faces of the families. After the examination of its description and circulation, the problems existing in the three catalogs are found. Further, he thought that there might be two true and fake "Yellow Mao Scenic Pictures", so as to question that this picture might not be the original handwriting of Tang Yin, but a pseudo-version of Chapter 5th, Chapter 6th. Still, it continues to examine and pass on Tang Yin's paintings of literati characters as "Wang ao's Mountain drawing", "Peitai actual scene Map", "late Spring Forest Chicken Picture", "Guan Shan Travel Map", "Guan Mei Picture", "empty Mountain Changxiao Picture", and at the same time, from the aspects of the inscription and postscript of these paintings, the description, and so on. Finally, the author draws the conclusion that the brush and ink chapping method of these paintings is too far away from Tang Yin's standard works and is suspected to be fake. On the basis of previous studies, this paper corrects some fallacies in the previous researches on Tang Yin's calligraphy and painting. The representative works of Tang Yin that can be used as reference standards are redefined and divided into stages, and the development process of Tang Yin's calligraphy and painting art is clarified. Tang Yin's landscape painting works, which have always been disputed, are divided into two styles. And summarizes its literati style landscape painting common character and the characteristic, then will sum up the theory attempt to be applied to the practice, namely has examined several pieces as Tang Yin's work, finally has raised the question, in order to benefit Tang Yin's calligraphy and painting appraisal.
【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：J212

【参考文献】