摘要
历史理论的本质其实是一种言论道德,设计这门新型学科出现后,为掌控这种言论道德,历史学家们对其发展历史的建构从未停止。历史学者撰写的历史本身也是历史的一部分,对他们的创作历史进行研究也是研究历史的一种方法。文章通过对英国设计史学界理论家代表佩夫斯纳和福蒂的设计史研究方法进行分析比较,总结出尽管他们研究内容相同,结果却大相径庭的原因。
The essence of historical theory is a kind of moral of comment.Since the emergence of the design,historians have never stopped developing its history,in order to master the initiative of this newly subject.History written by historians is also part of history,so studying the history which historians have created is also a way of studying history.This paper tries to compare the research methods of Nikolaus Pevsner and Adrian Forty,in order to find out the reason why the results are so different even though they have studied the same things.
作者
王发堂
王帅
Wang Fatang;Wang Shuai
出处
《建筑与文化》
2020年第7期96-97,共2页
Architecture & Culture
关键词
佩夫斯纳
福蒂
设计史研究
宏观史学
微观史学
Nikolaus Pevsner
Adrian Forty
the research on design history
Macro-history
Micro-history