论文部分内容阅读
陈丹青先生在我院的讲座上,我现场提问提到了《有害的艺术》一文,现写此文也谈谈我的一些粗浅看法。向南先生《有害的艺术》一文(载《美苑》2000年第4期,经《美术》2001年第1期转载,甚有“扶正”之意。)及因之引发的赵明荣先生《为后现代艺术辩护》一文(《美苑》2000年第5期),涉及的中心问题其实是关于中国后现代艺术的发展状况、方向的问题。两篇文章都各道出了作者所关心的一面。向先生由具体的事实出发,激愤地抨击了后现代艺术活动中某些不良现象。相对而言,赵先生的文章更客观和深入,着眼于后现代艺术的生存思考。 我是生于六十年代末的年青人,也还能理解向先生的愤慨,比如我阅
In his lecture at our college, Mr. Chen Danqing raised a question on “harmful art” in my on-the-spot question. Now I also write about some of my superficial opinions. The article “Harmful Art” written by Mr. Nan (contained in “Beautiful Garden” No. 4, 2000, reprinted in the first issue of “Fine Arts” in 2001, has the very meaning of “righting.”) And Mr. Zhao Mingrong Postmodern Art Defense “(” Mei Yuan "No.5, 2000), the central issue involved is actually the question about the development and orientation of China’s postmodern art. Each of the two articles reveals the author’s concern. Starting from the concrete fact, Mr. Xiang criticized some unfavorable phenomena in post-modern art activities. Relatively speaking, Mr. Zhao’s article is more objective and in-depth, focusing on the survival of post-modern art thinking. I was born in the late sixties young people, but also to understand the indignation of Mr.. For example, I read