论文部分内容阅读
陈传席先生在《书法不是一种专业》(原载《美术观察》2002年第8期,《书法报》2003年2月10日转载)一文中,强调身份、学养对书法的作用,确实引人深思,颇具启发意义,但行文中也有难以令人信服之处。以下谈三点意见。 一、过去没有的,现在就不能有吗? 陈先生为了证明“书法不是一种专业”,举了一大堆例子,从魏国的太傅锤繇起,一直说到现代的林散之和启功,认为这些书家并不以书法为专业。这对过去的书法家而言是说得通的,问题是,书
In his article “Calligraphy is not a specialty” (originally published in Art Observer No. 8, 2002, Calligraphy was reprinted on February 10, 2003), Chen Chuan-shi emphasized the role of identity and schooling in calligraphy and indeed introduced Thoughtful, enlightening, but there are hard lines to convince. Talk about the following three points. First, the past did not, and now you can not have it? Mr. Chen in order to prove that “calligraphy is not a professional”, cites a bunch of examples, from the Taigu hammer Wei Guo, has been talking about the modern forest scattered and Kai-kung, think these calligraphers are not professional. This is plausible to the calligraphers of the past, the question is, books