让艺术为历史建基——论海德格尔艺术批评的历史维度

Art as the Foundation of History: On the Historical Dimension of Heidegger’s Art Criticism

海德格尔与夏皮罗有关梵·高的画作《鞋》的阐释之争近年来重新激起了国内学者的强烈兴趣,批评海德格尔者有之,为其辩护者亦有之,然而无论学者们的观点存在多大的分歧,有一点却似乎已经成为共识,即认为海德格尔的艺术批评主要源自艺术哲学,缺乏像夏皮罗那样的艺术史眼光。这种观点在一定程度上是对海德格尔思想的误解,实际上海氏的艺术批评始终贯穿着一个历史维度,因为他同样追问了艺术的历史,而且十分关注艺术与历史的关系。只不过夏皮罗考察的是具体艺术作品的历史,海德格尔探究的却是艺术之本质的起源。前者主张把历史作为评价艺术的基础,后者却试图让艺术为历史建基。纵观海德格尔的艺术批评,这一维度可以划分为三个层面:让艺术为此在历史建基、让艺术为民族历史建基以及让艺术为存有历史建基。

In the latest years,the debate between Heidegger and Schapiro on Van Gogh’s Shoes has received considerable attention among the Chinese scholars.Despite the controversy over Heidegger’s interpretation of the painting,scholars have reached an agreement that Heidegger’s art criticism derives from his philosophy of art and therefore lacks the insight of art history abundant in Schapiro’s scholarship.This assertion,to a certain extent,misunderstands Heidegger’s thought.This paper argues that Heidegger’s art criticism also contains a historical dimension,for he not only investigates art history but also pays close attention to the relationship between art and history.The difference,however,is that Schapiro examines the history of specific artworks,whereas Heidegger explores the origin and essence of art.In other words,the former views history as the basis for evaluating art,while the latter attempts to institute art as the foundation for history.This historical dimension in Heidegger’s art criticism can be understood on three levels:to institute art as the foundation the history of Dasein,to institute art as the foundation for the history of the nation,and to institute art as the foundation for the history of Seyn.