(雙語(yǔ))月亮和六便士 第1章(2)

00:00

00:00

MP3下載

https://online2.tingclass.net/lesson/shi0529/10000/10334/ylhlbs2.mp3

https://image.tingclass.net/statics/js/2012

It was not till four years after Strickland's death that Maurice Huret wrote that article in the Mercure de France which rescued the unknown painter from oblivion and blazed the trail which succeeding writers, with more or less docility, have followed. For a long time no critic has enjoyed in France a more incontestable authority, and it was impossible not to be impressed by the claims he made; they seemed extravagant; but later judgments have confirmed his estimate, and the reputation of Charles Strickland is now firmly established on the lines which he laid down. The rise of this reputation is one of the most romantic incidents in the history of art. But I do not propose to deal with Charles Strickland's work except in so far as it touches upon his character. I cannot agree with the painters who claim superciliously that the layman can understand nothing of painting, and that he can best show his appreciation of their works by silence and a cheque-book. It is a grotesque misapprehension which sees in art no more than a craft comprehensible perfectly only to the craftsman: art is a manifestation of emotion, and emotion speaks a language that all may understand. But I will allow that the critic who has not a practical knowledge of technique is seldom able to say anything on the subject of real value, and my ignorance of painting is extreme. Fortunately, there is no need for me to risk the adventure, since my friend, Mr. Edward Leggatt, an able writer as well as an admirable painter, has exhaustively discussed Charles Strickland's work in a little book ("A Modern Artist： Notes on the Work of Charles Strickland， " by Edward Leggatt， A. R. H. A. Martin Secker， 1917.)which is a charming example of a style, for the most part, less happily cultivated in England than in France.

直到思特里克蘭德去世四年以后，莫利斯·胥瑞才寫(xiě)了那篇發(fā)表在《法蘭西信使》上的文章，使這位不為人所知的畫(huà)家不致湮沒(méi)無(wú)聞。他的這篇文章打響了第一炮，很多怯于標(biāo)新的作家這才踏著他的足跡走了下去。在很長(zhǎng)一段時(shí)間內(nèi)法國(guó)藝術(shù)評(píng)論界更沒(méi)有哪個(gè)人享有比胥瑞更無(wú)可爭(zhēng)辯的權(quán)威。胥瑞提出的論點(diǎn)不可能不給人以深刻的印象，看起來(lái)他對(duì)思特里克蘭德的稱許似乎有些過(guò)分，但后來(lái)輿論的裁決卻證實(shí)了他評(píng)價(jià)的公正；而查理斯·思特里克蘭德的聲名便也在他所定的調(diào)子上不可動(dòng)搖地建立起來(lái)了。思特里克蘭德聲名噪起，這在藝術(shù)史上實(shí)在是最富于浪漫主義味道的一個(gè)事例。但是我在這里并不想對(duì)查理斯·思特里克蘭德的藝術(shù)作品有所評(píng)論，除非在這些作品涉及到畫(huà)家性格的時(shí)候。我對(duì)某些畫(huà)家的意見(jiàn)不敢茍同，他們傲慢地認(rèn)為外行根本不懂得繪畫(huà)，門(mén)外漢要表示對(duì)藝術(shù)的鑒賞，最好的方法就是免開(kāi)尊口，大大方方地掏出支票簿。老實(shí)講，把藝術(shù)看作只有名工巧匠才能完全理解的藝術(shù)技巧，其實(shí)是一種荒謬的誤解。藝術(shù)是什么？藝術(shù)是感情的表露，藝術(shù)使用的是一種人人都能理解的語(yǔ)言。但是我也承認(rèn)，藝術(shù)評(píng)論家如果對(duì)技巧沒(méi)有實(shí)際知識(shí)，是很少能作出真正有價(jià)值的評(píng)論的；而我自己對(duì)繪畫(huà)恰好是非常無(wú)知的。幸而在這方面我無(wú)庸冒任何風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，因?yàn)槲业呐笥褠?ài)德華·雷加特先生既是一位寫(xiě)文章的高手，又是一位深有造詣的畫(huà)家，他在一本小書(shū)里【《一位當(dāng)代畫(huà)家，對(duì)查理斯·思特里克蘭德繪畫(huà)的評(píng)論》，愛(ài)爾蘭皇家學(xué)院會(huì)員愛(ài)德華·雷加特著，1917年馬丁·塞克爾出版。（作者注）】對(duì)查理斯·思特里克蘭德的作品已經(jīng)作了詳盡的探索；這本書(shū)的優(yōu)美文風(fēng)也為我們樹(shù)立了一個(gè)典范。很可惜，這種文風(fēng)今天在英國(guó)遠(yuǎn)不如在法國(guó)那么時(shí)興了。