艺术处境与历史意识
发布时间：2018-09-09 16:57
【摘要】：对于艺术的沉思和考察,总是要服从一种双重的历史性。这种历史性既是艺术本身的,也是学科性质的。正如海德格尔所言,夕U乎从人们专门考察艺术和艺术家以来,这种考察就被称之为美学的考察。今人我们可以看到,在德意志思想史中,美学源起,继而发展到最为成熟完备,并最终逸出了其学科范围的这一历史路向有迹可循。对美学的这一历史的思考,不仅有助于我们认清美学的学科性质,而且对建设我国新世纪美学理论亦有助益。 虽然如今美学已经获得了其独立的学科地位,但对美学哲学基础的认知仍具有根本的决定性。美学的发展与西方哲学史的发展密切关联。任何一种理论视域,都具有在根本意义上起作用的理论预设。任何一种理论视域的兴衰变迁,归根结底乃是其理论预设的兴衰变迁。正如海德格尔在《艺术作品的本源》一文的后记中所言,对艺术的沉思并不在于解答艺术之谜,而在于认识这个谜。这即是说,企图在一种固有的、主客对立的认识论立场上探究艺术之谜的做法是行不通的。这一现成的立场既遮蔽了艺术本身固有的历史性,又遮蔽了对艺术进行观照的各种理论视域的历史性。这一双重的遮蔽有碍于美学或者说艺术考察本身的发展。当今学界,一些有识之士已经意识到这方面的问题,并对此进行了开创性的探索。 有鉴于此,在这本关注理论问题的文章中,我尝试用“艺术处境”这样一个术语来代替对艺术之本质的现成规定。对艺术本质的现成规定将关于“艺术之谜”的问题域弄得狭隘了。如果不突破这种对艺术现成的、框架式的规定,就无法触摸到艺术与真理之间生成性的、永葆活力的关系。因此,在本文中从一开始,艺术处境问题就不是以定义方式提出的,而是通过对儿位思想家之间对话的钩稽展示出来的。我希望展示出这个问题所具有的一种动态的、不断展开、不断丰富的状态。 在这项考察中,艺术处境问题所涉及到的理论视域的哲学预设问题总是以一种相对于艺术处境问题本身的优先性而被提出来。关于艺术处境问题的理论视域,涉及到西方思想史上的根本性争论。此处姑且用“古今之争”来指明这场争论的性质。这场争论事关西方思想中·种根木性的理论视域的变迁。这种理论视域便是历史的视域。历史视域在西方哲学史中并非从来就有的,而是随着西方思想的“古今之争”而兴起的。而关于历史视域的问题在木文所涉及到的几位德国大思想家的笔下(或者说从黑格尔到列奥·施特劳斯的思想史)得到了最集中的表达和反思。与此相应,关于艺术处境的问题,这儿位大思想家也在不同程度上涉及和思考到了。从而形成了关于这一问题的丰富的思想资源。 因此,本文关注“艺术处境”t“历史意识”之关系问题,并带着这个问题考察自黑格尔以来的德意志思想史。本文无论上篇还是下篇的考察,都不是一般意义仁的思想史或者艺术思想史的研究,恰切地说应该是一种问题史。这种研究并不要求面面俱到,例如对所涉及到的大思想家作个而的研究;向是带着针对性的问题发掘相关的思想资源,从而得出对此问题的认识和识断。
[Abstract]:As Heidegger said, this kind of investigation has been called aesthetic investigation since people have studied art and artists specially. Now we can see that it is in the history of German thought. The historical direction of aesthetics, which originates from, develops to the most mature and complete, and finally escapes from the scope of its subject, is to be followed. This historical reflection on aesthetics will not only help us to understand the disciplinary nature of aesthetics, but also contribute to the construction of aesthetic theory in the new century in China.
Although aesthetics has acquired its independent status as a discipline, its cognition of the philosophical foundation of aesthetics is still fundamentally decisive. The development of aesthetics is closely related to the development of the history of Western philosophy. As Heidegger put it in his postscript to The Origin of Art, the contemplation of art does not lie in solving the mystery of art, but in understanding it. That is to say, it is impractical to attempt to explore the mystery of art from an inherent, subjective and objective epistemological standpoint. This ready-made position not only obscures the inherent historicity of art itself, but also obscures the historicity of the various theoretical horizons in which art is viewed. This dual obscurity hinders the development of aesthetics or art research itself. In the present academic circles, some insightful people have realized and made pioneering efforts in this regard. Exploration.
In view of this, I try to use the term "artistic situation" instead of the existing regulations on the essence of art in this article which focuses on theoretical issues. The existing regulations on the essence of art narrow the scope of the question of "the mystery of art". So, from the very beginning of this article, the question of artistic situation is not put forward by definition, but is revealed by the dialogues between children thinkers. The state.
In this investigation, the philosophical presupposition of the theoretical horizon involved in the question of artistic situation is always put forward as a priority over the question of artistic situation itself. This controversy is related to the change of the theoretical horizon of roots and roots in Western thought. This theoretical horizon is the historical horizon. The historical horizon is not always existed in the history of Western philosophy, but rises with the "controversy between the ancient and the modern" of Western thought. German great thinker's works (or the history of thought from Hegel to Leo Strauss) have been expressed and reflected in the most concentrated way. Accordingly, the great thinker here has also touched on and pondered on the problem of artistic situation to varying degrees, thus forming a wealth of ideological resources on this issue.
Therefore, this paper focuses on the relationship between the "artistic situation" t "historical consciousness" and examines the history of German thought since Hegel with this question. The first and the second parts of this paper are not the study of the history of general benevolence or of artistic thought, but rather a history of problem. It is not necessary to be all-inclusive, for example, to make a study of the great thinkers involved, and to explore the relevant ideological resources with a specific problem, so as to come to an understanding and judgment of the problem.
【学位授予单位】：四川师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：J01
本文编号：2233018
[Abstract]:As Heidegger said, this kind of investigation has been called aesthetic investigation since people have studied art and artists specially. Now we can see that it is in the history of German thought. The historical direction of aesthetics, which originates from, develops to the most mature and complete, and finally escapes from the scope of its subject, is to be followed. This historical reflection on aesthetics will not only help us to understand the disciplinary nature of aesthetics, but also contribute to the construction of aesthetic theory in the new century in China.
Although aesthetics has acquired its independent status as a discipline, its cognition of the philosophical foundation of aesthetics is still fundamentally decisive. The development of aesthetics is closely related to the development of the history of Western philosophy. As Heidegger put it in his postscript to The Origin of Art, the contemplation of art does not lie in solving the mystery of art, but in understanding it. That is to say, it is impractical to attempt to explore the mystery of art from an inherent, subjective and objective epistemological standpoint. This ready-made position not only obscures the inherent historicity of art itself, but also obscures the historicity of the various theoretical horizons in which art is viewed. This dual obscurity hinders the development of aesthetics or art research itself. In the present academic circles, some insightful people have realized and made pioneering efforts in this regard. Exploration.
In view of this, I try to use the term "artistic situation" instead of the existing regulations on the essence of art in this article which focuses on theoretical issues. The existing regulations on the essence of art narrow the scope of the question of "the mystery of art". So, from the very beginning of this article, the question of artistic situation is not put forward by definition, but is revealed by the dialogues between children thinkers. The state.
In this investigation, the philosophical presupposition of the theoretical horizon involved in the question of artistic situation is always put forward as a priority over the question of artistic situation itself. This controversy is related to the change of the theoretical horizon of roots and roots in Western thought. This theoretical horizon is the historical horizon. The historical horizon is not always existed in the history of Western philosophy, but rises with the "controversy between the ancient and the modern" of Western thought. German great thinker's works (or the history of thought from Hegel to Leo Strauss) have been expressed and reflected in the most concentrated way. Accordingly, the great thinker here has also touched on and pondered on the problem of artistic situation to varying degrees, thus forming a wealth of ideological resources on this issue.
Therefore, this paper focuses on the relationship between the "artistic situation" t "historical consciousness" and examines the history of German thought since Hegel with this question. The first and the second parts of this paper are not the study of the history of general benevolence or of artistic thought, but rather a history of problem. It is not necessary to be all-inclusive, for example, to make a study of the great thinkers involved, and to explore the relevant ideological resources with a specific problem, so as to come to an understanding and judgment of the problem.
【学位授予单位】：四川师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：J01
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前1条
1 刘小枫;历史终结了?——从约阿希姆到柯耶夫[J];浙江学刊;2002年03期
，本文编号：2233018
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/yishull/2233018.html
