列维—斯特劳斯的美学思想研究

发布时间：2018-06-24 14:37

本文选题：结构 + 野性的思维　；参考：《广西师范大学》2002年硕士论文

【摘要】： 列维-斯特劳斯是二十世纪最有影响的思想家和文化人类学家之一。他的思想中蕴含着美学的思考。列维-斯特劳斯认为人类存在着一种普遍的心理结构，，这种结构不是形式，也不是某种社会关系，而是一种人们赖以认识自然、创造文化的可感、不可见又具有普遍概括性的抽象物。因而，他的这种看法被看作是康德式的先验唯物主义，但他又强凋他并不否认物质基础，而只是想对马克思没有充分阐明的上层建筑理论进行进一步的阐释，尤其是在上层建筑的相对独立性及主观能动性方面。以此为理论出发点，他提出了一系列美学问题并作出了自己独特的回答。列维-斯特劳斯认为文化与自然的对立是不可避免的，因为文化是人类使自己与自然相区别的标志。他继承了西方由笛卡尔开创的从语言探讨心灵的传统，把语言作为理性的人的唯一区分标志。他从人的语言能力去发现人的理性能力，而语言有一种符号象征性，因而依据语言的逻辑建构的文化也具有符号象征性。他用亲属结构的分析、神话结构的分析来证明这一点。由此，他提出文化与自然的对立是在象征符号的层面上形成的，所以也可以在象征符号的层面上来加以克服的观点。他通过对“野性思维”的研究来寻找实现这一目标的方法。野性的思维有具体性和整体性的特点，它能够实现对立调和在于其“转换”的功能和“仪式”的功能。“转换”在于类比思维的存在，因而能使具体形象之间的意义，具体形象与抽象意义相互联系；“仪式”则是原始文化消除差异，产生同一幻觉的一种符号。在这里，他试图把美学上的一些假设或寓言式的解释变成条理分明、逻辑清晰的实证论述。列维-斯特劳斯思想中有着明显的反主体的倾向。他崇尚体系和结构的至上地位，把人看作体系和结构中的一项，与其他项一样决无任何固有的意义。他驳斥萨特，提出是无意识的结构赋予人及事物以意义，而不是有意识的人本身，并且通过证明历史的主观性来论证企图用历史的客观性来证明人的意义也是徒劳的。他的思考打破了主体自律的神话，指出了主体与现实间互动性的构成及其复杂的关系，越出了人类中心主义的狭隘，同时又坚实地立足于人的独特存在，这为美学思考踏入新的广阔天地打开了一条充满希望的通道，美感纯粹主观性或客观性的学说因此受到强有力的驳斥，美学研究的视野也因此由局限于艺术的小天地扩大到了整个人类文化之中。这是其人学思想中所蕴含的美学问题及启示。在解释艺术时，列维-斯特劳斯也提出了一些新颖的观点。关于艺术的起源问题，他认为“游离的能指”是所有艺术的保证。因为在他看来，自从人作为人一出现就已拥有一种能指的完整性，这种能指的完整性在于能指总是难于与所指完全相匹配，因而这也就产生了能指相对于与其相匹配的所指来说的过剩，所以，在人们理解世界的努力中，他总要处理意指关系的过剩问题，这实际上就赋予了以象征能力为标志的人类文化寻求一种“幻觉的平衡”的必然性。艺术就是实现这种幻觉平衡的手段。这种看法对解释艺术欣赏中的普遍性问题和艺术与疯狂的关系问题有一定的启示，但仍因其与“潜意识”不可割离的联系而同样具有局限性。关于艺术的界定，列维-斯特劳斯的观点有两点与众不同：一是认为艺术是一种压缩模型，二是认为艺术处于科学知识和神话或巫术思想二者之间。他认为在艺术品的“小模型”里，整体的知识先于部分的知识，人们可以获得一种领会和占有了对象的感觉，因而产生美感。这与康德对崇高感的论述相似。另外，他强调了偶然性因素在艺术创造中的重要地位，尽管艺术的最终结果是发现或显现一个结构，但它的出发点是偶然性的事件，这与冈布里奇的“制作先于匹配”的命题相似。由此，列维-斯特劳斯认为原始艺术比专业或学院艺术更接近于完美，所以他对现代艺术颇有微词。这与其对艺术与社会的关系的观点有关。他联系原始社会的阶级结构，通过对其艺术的折半表现的分析，提出了关于艺术与个性、与社会的关系的新的启示：艺术不仅是个性分裂的表现，艺术事实上也促成着个性的分裂；艺术实际上也就是一种社会矛盾的幻觉式的解决方法。同时他对艺术以幻梦的方式解决矛盾持肯定的态度。由此可见，列维-斯特劳斯的美学观中包含着一种审美乌托邦的思想，但又与阿多诺的审美乌托邦有着本质上的区别。列纣卜听特竹斯的美学思想涉及了二十世纪两方美学思潮中许多关键性的问题：主体问题。意识形态问题、艺术的启蒙问题等。他对传统的继承与开拓在整个西方美学发展的过松中起着垦翌的爪上启卜o作川：他彬占构主义的奎要代表，又为解构主义留下了具有生长力的理论潜源。同时，他也提山了研究美学的新的方法论的问题，即将一个艺术或美学问题用丰富的现实材料来分析，作形而下的证明，而避免形而上的么思。这对美学研究更好地实现历灾与逻辑的统一有着重要的启示意义。
[Abstract]:Levi Strauss is one of the most influential thinkers and cultural anthropologists in the twentieth Century. His thoughts contain aesthetic thinking.
Levi - Strauss believes that human beings have a general psychological structure, which is not a form or a social relationship, but a kind of abstract object that people rely on to understand nature, create a sense of culture, and be invisible and general generality. Therefore, his view is regarded as a transcendental materialism of Kantian, but He did not deny the material basis, but just wanted to further explain the superstructure theory that Marx did not fully elucidate, especially on the relative independence and subjective initiative of the superstructure. As a theoretical point of departure, he put forward a series of aesthetic questions and made his own unique answer.
Levi Strauss believes that the antagonism between culture and nature is inevitable, because culture is the symbol of human being and nature. He inherits the only distinction between the people in the West which is created by Descartes to explore the mind from the language, and the only distinction between the people of the language. And language has a symbolic symbol, so the culture constructed according to the logic of the language has symbolic symbolism. He uses the analysis of the structure of kinship and the analysis of the myth structure to prove it. Thus, he proposed that the antagonism between culture and nature is formed on the level of symbolic symbols, so it can also be added to the symbol level. Through the study of "wild thinking", he looked for the way to achieve this goal. The thinking of the wild has the characteristics of concreteness and wholeness. It can achieve the harmony of opposites in the function of "conversion" and "ritual". "Conversion" lies in the existence of class bill, so it can make the concrete image. Meaning, the concrete image and the abstract meaning relate to each other; "ritual" is a symbol of the original culture to eliminate the difference and produce the same illusion. Here, he tries to turn some of the aesthetic hypotheses or allegorical explanations into a clear and clear and clear demonstration. There is a clear anti subject in Levi Strauss thought. He admires the supremacy of the system and structure, as one in the system and structure, and has no inherent meaning as other items. He refutes Sutter, suggesting that the unconscious structure gives people and things the meaning, not the conscious person itself, and demonstrates the attempt to use historical guests by proving the subjectivity of history. It is in vain to prove the meaning of human being. His thinking breaks the myth of subject self-discipline, points out the composition and complex relationship of the interactivity between the subject and the reality, beyond the narrowness of the anthropocentrism, and is firmly based on the unique existence of the human being, which opens a full of beauty to the new broad space. The passage of hope, the doctrine of pure subjectivity or objectivity of aesthetic feeling has been strongly refuted, and the view of aesthetic research has been expanded from the small world of art to the whole of human culture. This is the aesthetic problem and inspiration contained in his humanistic thought.
In the interpretation of art, Levi Strauss also put forward some new ideas. On the origin of art, he believed that the "free energy" was the guarantee of all art. For in his view, since man appeared as a human being had an integrality of the signifier, and the integrity of the signifier is that the signifier is always difficult to end with. Therefore, in the effort to understand the world, he always deals with the excess of the meaning of the relationship, which, in fact, endows the human culture marked by symbolism as the necessity of "the balance of illusion". The means to realize the illusion of illusion has some inspiration to explain the universal problems in art appreciation and the relationship between art and madness. But it is still limited because of its uncut connection with the "subconscious". As for the definition of art, Levi Strauss's views are different: one is to recognize it. Art is a compression model, two is that art is between scientific knowledge and mythology or witchcraft thought two. He thinks that in the "small model" of art, the whole knowledge is preceded by part of the knowledge, and people can get a sense of understanding and possession of the object and produce aesthetic feeling. This is with Kant's discourse on the sense of sublime. In addition, he emphasized the importance of contingency in artistic creation, although the final result of art is to discover or reveal a structure, but its starting point is accidental, which is similar to the proposition of Bridge's "make a match". Thus, Levi Strauss thinks that primitive art is more than professional or college art. It is closer to perfection, so he has a rather small word for modern art. It is related to his view of the relationship between art and society. He relates the class structure of the primitive society, and through the analysis of the half performance of his art, he puts forward new revelations about art and personality and the relationship with society: art is not only a manifestation of split personality, but art. In fact, it also contributes to the split of personality; art is actually an illusion of social contradiction. At the same time, he holds an affirmative attitude towards the solution of contradictions in the way of illusions in art. Thus, Levi Strauss's aesthetic view contains an aesthetic utopian thought, but also with Adorno's aesthetic Utopias. There is an essential difference.
Lebty J's aesthetic thought involves many key issues in the two party aesthetic trend in twentieth Century: subject matter. Ideology.
Problems, the Enlightenment of art, and so on. His inheritance and development of tradition played a role in the development of western aesthetics. O
Sichuan: the representative of Kui Yao, a founder of his theory of architecture, left a theoretical source of growth for deconstruction. At the same time, he also promoted the aesthetics of research.
The problem of a new methodology is to analyze an artistic or aesthetical problem with abundant practical materials, and to make a proof of form and to avoid form.
This is an important inspiration for aesthetics research to better realize the unity of calamity and logic.
【学位授予单位】：广西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2002
【分类号】：I01

【引证文献】