中国美术史研究中的“临仿”现象探析——以美国学者高居翰和班宗华对董其昌创作手法来源研究为例

Investigation of the “Imitation” in Chinese Art History Studies:Cases of US Scholars James Cahill and Richard Barnhart’s Studies on the Sources of Dong Qichang’s Creation Methods

美国学者高居翰于1982年提出,董其昌《葑泾访古图》受到利玛窦所携铜版画之影响。16年后(1998),另一位美国学者班宗华以研究董其昌《婉娈草堂图》的新颖风格为基础,高度“临仿”了高居翰的论证思路,并以此向后者表达了特别“致敬”。班宗华的研究也带有一些创意,基于新的史料与作品证据将董、利二人的“一面之缘”由万历壬寅(1602)的“南京”改为万历丁酉(1597)的“南昌”。然而,《婉娈草堂图》并非惯常意义上的“草堂图”,所采用的“李郭”风格不仅是对受画者陈继儒早年“绝意仕进”的同情,更与作画前两个月发生的焦竑“科场案”密切相关。科举取士和士大夫流放等现实问题,使得董其昌当时根本无暇沉浸于西方铜版画的新异风格与趣味当中。

US scholar James Cahill argued in 1982 that Dong Qichang’s work Fengjing Fanggu Tu was influenced by the copperplate etching brought to China by Matteo Ricci. 16 years later (1998), based on Dong Qichang’s Wanluan Caotang Tu, another US scholar Richard Barnhart "imitated" James Cahill’s argument and showed his special "respect" for James Cahill. Richard Barnhart’s research is creative as he changed the meeting between Dong Qichang and Matteo Ricci from "Nanjing" in 1602 ( Renyin year in Wanli) to "Nan-chang" in 1597 ( Dingyou year in Wanli). However, Wanluan Caotang Tu is not a normal "Caotang tu", rather, the style of "Li Guo" is not only a sympathy with the receiver Chen Jiru’s "refusion to promotion" in his early years but also relates to the "case of imperial examination" two months ago. Reality issues such as appointment by imperial examination and exile of literati at that time bothered Dong Qichang so that he was not able to indulge in the new style and pleasure of Western copperplate etching.