History of Chinese Painting, by Chen Shizeng.
The History of Chinese Painting in Pictures (United States) by Gao Juhan.
A History of Chinese Art, by Michael Sullivan.
Academic controversy].
Since the beginning of the 21st century, with the continuous introduction of new research theories and models, the field of art history research has become more and more open, and the research of art history, which was based on visual, aesthetic and style, has entered a broader field of humanities, history and social science research. Although new models and technologies have greatly expanded the boundaries of art history research, and art history has gradually entered the "public field" and become "popular", this deep integration and cross-border has also led to new problems in art history research to a certain extent—the core of art history is blurred, the research is generalized, and it is similar to its peers and brother disciplines. For a discipline, too much cross-border can easily lead to gradual loss, leading to the mediocrity and retreat of the discipline, and art history is increasingly irrelevant to "art". The most urgent task in the study of Chinese art history is to do a good job of upholding integrity while continuing the existing academic traditions.
Art history is the science that studies the occurrence, development and laws of human art. In 1844, the University of Berlin established the first chair in the history of art (fine arts), and in the mid-19th century, the discipline of art history was established in universities in German-speaking countries. As a well-known scholar in the history of art history research, the German-American art historian Panofsky wrote "Art History as a Humanities", which expounded the humanistic concept and basic working methods of modern art history, that is, the research ideas and methods that take artists and works of art as the ontology, and aesthetic judgment and style analysis as the characteristics of the discipline, so as to outline the face of art history, art trends and art schools. After 100 years, this research method has become a fundamental method of art historical research.
The mission and function of art history are inseparable from the ontology of art. All research directions and methods of art history must be carried out around the ontology of art, whether it is traditional methods, or borrowing or quoting from other humanities and social science methods. Nowadays, some interdisciplinary art history research is actually using art to study history, and art is the means and bridge of research, rather than the starting point and end point of research, so some problems have arisen. First of all, this kind of art history research is relatively alienated from art ontology, and at the same time, it also deviates from the original intention of art history research, and weakens the theoretical foundation of art history as a discipline. If there are no relatively clear disciplinary boundaries, how can we talk about interdisciplinarity?Secondly, this new wave of art history research ignores the ontology and epistemology of art history, but is overly enthusiastic about the party, attaches too much importance to micro research, and lacks macro research on art history. Thirdly, such interdisciplinary art research often fails to deeply understand the techniques, connotations and implications of art itself, so most of them revolve around the periphery of art ontology, rather than the substantive study of the ontology of artworks. Each discipline has its own mission and goals, and art history can intersect with cultural history, intellectual history, and social history, but it should not become an auxiliary tool of those disciplines. Art history must adhere to the research path and goal of its own disciplinary characteristics: ontological research is the mainstream, the backbone, the subject, and the right path.
Here, I would like to talk about the implications of archaeology for the study of art history.
Modern art history is the "companion history" of archaeology, and archaeological materials are an important part of the research object of art history, so art history and archaeology are closely related. The author has been engaged in archaeological study and research, and has received enlightenment from the foundation of archaeology and the characteristics of the discipline.
Archaeology has its own independent disciplinary characteristics. First of all, archaeology has a definite concept. Archaeology is the science of studying the history of ancient societies based on the remains of ancient human activities. Secondly, archaeology has a clear object of study. Specifically, the research objects of archaeology include not only cultural relics generated by human activities, but also natural relics that have been intervened by human beings, as well as various types of relics formed by human activities and the sites and areas formed by their spatial collection.
More importantly, archaeology has clear research theories and methods. Field archaeology is the first step of archaeological research, which adopts scientific and systematic methods to obtain and record all kinds of physical objects and relics buried in the ground and scattered on the ground, and uses different scientific and technological means to detect and analyze them, so as to obtain as much information as possible, and then form a self-contained theory and method of field investigation, exploration, excavation and indoor collation, analysis and research. Scientific field archaeology is a fundamental symbol of the birth of modern archaeology. On this basis, different academic research theories and methods have been formed, such as stratigraphy and typology. Some of these archaeological theories also have Chinese characteristics, such as the theories of "archaeological culture", "faunal types", and Chinese standards for judging civilization. Although the study of archaeology has become more and more diverse, the foundation of archaeology will not be shaken if there are clear theories and research methods in the discipline.
Art history is closely related to archaeology. How to distinguish art archaeology from art historical research?With different disciplinary missions and different disciplinary research methods, it can point to different research contents and research results. The study of art history takes the work of art as the primary material, accompanied by aesthetic judgment and style analysis, through which it can draw a clear line from history and archaeology. At the same time, this clear research object and research direction not only distinguishes it from the same art theory and art criticism, but also from philosophy, aesthetics and other guiding theories. Therefore, in order to exert its unique value and function, the research of art history must also start from the ontology, use its own unique research orientation and research methods, and lead the research content of the life.
Of course, emphasizing that art historical research must adhere to ontological research does not completely deny the value of interdisciplinary research.
The study of art history has a broad scope. For example, from the perspective of arts and crafts, from the germination of jade culture 9,000 years ago, to the breathtaking jade and "Shen Hui" image of Liangzhu culture 5,000 years ago, and then to the contemporary Olympic medals integrated into the jade civilization to convey the national context and image, jade-related artistic creation has outstanding continuity and innovation. These works of art contain rich historical backgrounds, social factors and aesthetic trends, including classic or innovative skills, techniques and artistic concepts, and are often full of glorious human values, but also contain eternal beauty and artistry. Therefore, the study of art history needs to constantly enrich its connotation.
In short, the study of art history needs to be upright first, and then innovate on the basis of in-depth research on tradition and ontology. It is necessary to systematically summarize the historical characteristics and laws of the development of art history, take art ontology as the center, and absorb the aesthetic signs, value standards and profound meanings contained in artworks.
Author: Cao Fangfang, Lecturer, School of Arts, Peking University
Project team: reporters Zhang Yumei, Yu Yuanyuan, Xu Xinyi).