后现代艺术批评中的历史观批判

The Critique of Historical Ideology in Postmodern Art Criticism

"历史观"是后现代主义时期批评家讨论的核心话题之一。与后现代艺术批评几乎同时兴起的新表现主义,因为倾向回归往昔的历史,于是立刻成为后现代艺术批评的批判对象。意大利批评家奥利瓦以超前卫之名,强调艺术家回归绘画媒介和个人内在性的创作方式。这类向后看的历史观受到其他批评家的批判。哈尔·福斯特、本雅明·布赫洛、克雷格·欧文斯等后现代批评家从精神分析的"退行"、历史主义的非历史性和保守主义的后现代主义等方面,批判了支持新表现主义话语的历史观。围绕历史观问题展开的这场后现代艺术批评之争,揭示出西方艺术从现代转向后现代时的历史阵痛。与此同时,诸如绘画的历史意义、艺术的终结等问题都在该语境中被提示出来。

Historical ideology was one of issue that was discussed by critics in the postmodern period.Neo-expressionism,which emerged almost simultaneously with postmodern art criticism,became a target of criticism because of its tendency to return to the history.The Italian critic Oliva,under the name of transavantgarde,emphasized the returning to painting and personal emotion.This type of backward-looking view of history was criticized by other critics.Postmodern critics such as Hal Foster,Benjamin Buchloh,and Craig Owens criticized the type of historical ideology that supported the Neo-expressionist discourse in terms of the“regression”of psychoanalysis,the ahistoricity of historicism,and the postmodernism of conservatism.The debate over postmodern art criticism,which revolves around the issue of historical ideology,hints at the historical pains of Western art as it shifts from modern to postmodern.At the same time,issues such as the historical significance of painting and the end of art are all prompted in that context.