摘要
二十世纪六十年代,美国耶鲁大学艺术史家乔治·库布勒在其著作《时间的形状:造物史研究简论》中认为,历史学家的具体贡献,在于他们发现了时间的各种形状,而要描述这些形状,从艺术出发可以更好地达到目的。三十年后,英国牛津大学艺术史家弗朗西斯·哈斯克尔的《历史及其图像:艺术及对往昔的阐释》一书也提出这样的观点:仅仅依靠文字记录来重现历史是不够的,将艺术与其他证据结合起来解释历史,也许是切实可行的一种方法。本文将这两本著作进行梳理和比较,尝试从中反思艺术史写作的方法及意义。
In 1960's,art historian George Kubler from Yale University argued in his work The Shape of Time:Remarks on the History of Things that the specific contribution of historians is that they found the different kinds of shape of time,and it is more suitable to start from art to describe the shape.After three decades,in Oxford,Brtish art historian Francis Haskell also put forward a view in his book History and Its Images:Art and the Interpretation of the Past:Only using written records to represent history is not enough,and combining art with other evidence to explain history may be a practical method.This paper analyses and compares these two books,to get the method and significance of art history writing.
出处
《美育研究》
2023年第1期162-174,共13页
