艺术和自我超越 Art and Self－Transcendence （Z）长了点儿，也就四页纸吧，耐心点就看完了。
————————————————————————————————————————
艺术和自我超越 Art and Self－Transcendence
贡布里希
一位人文主义者应邀对一批主要由自然科学家组成的听众发表演说，假如他略感歉疚，那是完全可以理解的。艺术研究就提供了让人歉疚的缘由。这种研究中的一个系统的或哲学的分支，即美学，到目前为止已存在了两个多世纪，然而耶稣会的文森特•特纳神父[Father Vincent Turner S．J．]在一篇题为“美学的荒芜”[The Desolation of Aesthetics]的文章中对这些努力持怀疑态度，我也有同样的怀疑。作为历史学家，我们略多地受人尊重些，然而，即使在史学界我们对风格和属性作出的特定推论也经不起检验，有时甚至并不比任何人的推测更准确。但是，转念一想，我作为一个艺术研究者，参加与价值有关的讨论会也并不感到歉意。尽管美学也许对“美”、“崇高”或者“表现”还不能发表完全正确的意见，尽管批评家在以往和现在的大师面前已显得声名狼藉，错误百出，但艺术史家至少能告诉你艺术家关于价值的思想，他本人也可以对这 (more...)
interesting article
(sorry that I'm typing in English as I do not have Chinese input in my lab. The article is so interesting that I can't wait commenting :P)
The author seems to argue in the following way.
1. Art answers some of the artists' private and communities' collective questions --> it shares some traits with scientific endeavors Since such quetions are time-dependent, art works therefore are also identifiable by specific styles. However, one shouldn't place emphasis on this aspect and ignore more ancient art works because aesthetic problems are never completely solved.
2. Art is somewhat subjective, illusory and cumulatively evolved by the entire artistic community.
Taken together, art is neither empirical science nor madman's frenzy. One shound't try to 'understand' or condescend a work of art; but only to seek self-transcendence in it.
But what is this self-transcendence attitude towards art works he prescribes?
Is it connecting to what the artist feels when he produces the piece? If so, then what should we feel about this?
Is it a kind of Nirvana state?
Is it a kind of transcendental noumenal understanding of art that is not comprehensible but only to be felt in a work of art?
The author seems to argue in the following way.
1. Art answers some of the artists' private and communities' collective questions --> it shares some traits with scientific endeavors Since such quetions are time-dependent, art works therefore are also identifiable by specific styles. However, one shouldn't place emphasis on this aspect and ignore more ancient art works because aesthetic problems are never completely solved.
2. Art is somewhat subjective, illusory and cumulatively evolved by the entire artistic community.
Taken together, art is neither empirical science nor madman's frenzy. One shound't try to 'understand' or condescend a work of art; but only to seek self-transcendence in it.
But what is this self-transcendence attitude towards art works he prescribes?
Is it connecting to what the artist feels when he produces the piece? If so, then what should we feel about this?
Is it a kind of Nirvana state?
Is it a kind of transcendental noumenal understanding of art that is not comprehensible but only to be felt in a work of art?
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
Huasing Association 1999 - 2013