{"title":"两个天才。洛马佐·迪德罗","authors":"Holger Rajavee","doi":"10.12697/BJAH.2016.11.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The goal of the article is to examine the theoretical and aesthetical views related to art and concerning painters, mainly in the French tradition, from the early 17th to the mid-18th century, starting with works by Gian Paolo Lomazzo and ending with the viewpoints of Denis Diderot. Using different examples from the texts of the key authors of their day, the article’s aim is to show how, starting in the early 17th century, the type of painter who can be described as a “learned genius” starts to develop; and from the beginning of the next, 18th century, this type gradually starts to transform into the subject that can be called a “mad genius” with all the main features of a modern artist. With the introduction of the neo-Platonic Mannerist doctrine of Lomazzo and Federico Zuccari the “learned genius” is now in its embryonic stage of development, differing greatly from the Renaissance painters of an earlier era. The “painter-mystic” is a self-centred person, whose “inner eye” is directly connected through contemplation with the Divine. In the middle of the 17th century, Charles Alphonse du Fresnoy, and especially Giovanni Pietro Bellori, by synthesizing Platonic and Aristotelian ideas, introduce us to the painter who possesses genius. He is freed from Mannerist mysticism and his main goal is to improve the imperfect Nature created by God through mind and reason. And to produce the perfect version of it in art – la belle nature – to achieve the result the artist has constantly developed himself – to learn and observe. The neo-classicist doctrine gradually burdens the genius with certain strict rules to follow; a process that is referred to here as “taming the genius”. So by the end of the 17th century, it is possible to talk about the “learned (but tamed) genius” – a noble, well-taught, reasonable and aesthetically high-minded artist. At the beginning of 18th century changes start occurring in the theoretical art paradigm, starting with Jean-Baptiste Du Bos and his Reflexions critiques sur la poesie et sur la peinture , written in 1719. This marks a new beginning in the development of the painter-genius figure and undoubtedly has significant influence on the writings that will follow on same subject. Du Bos starts to depart from the “reason-centred” painter, emphasizing the moment of sensory perception as the main criteria in the art of painting. There are two main differences from earlier times. Firstly, the author is now talking about a person who already is genius rather than possessing genius, as was the understanding earlier. Secondly, the person is already born a genius, which means that this quality is no longer taught. There aren’t any strict rules to harass the individual inventiveness and creativity of the artist. In the middle of 18th century many theoreticians, such as Jean le Rond d’Alembert, Etienne de Condillac, Voltaire etc, emphasized such important and very individualistic qualities of the painter as inventiveness, imagination, originality, enthusiasm. And they started to connect these to the centuries-old Platonic idea of poetic fury – furor poeticus – a state of mind in which the artist is almost maddened, insane and fully spontaneous while creating art. Denis Diderot is the first author who says outright that a painter-genius “is mad” ( qu‘il est fou ) and in doing so summons up the ideas of his predecessors. One could say that the different qualities mentioned above have guided the theoretical art narrative to the point where we can talk about the “mad genius”, who is recognized as the creator of art and this is the point where the modern painter-genius, whom we know today, comes to life.","PeriodicalId":52089,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of Art History","volume":"9 1","pages":"67-88"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.12697/BJAH.2016.11.04","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kaks geeniust. Lomazzost Diderot'ni\",\"authors\":\"Holger Rajavee\",\"doi\":\"10.12697/BJAH.2016.11.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The goal of the article is to examine the theoretical and aesthetical views related to art and concerning painters, mainly in the French tradition, from the early 17th to the mid-18th century, starting with works by Gian Paolo Lomazzo and ending with the viewpoints of Denis Diderot. Using different examples from the texts of the key authors of their day, the article’s aim is to show how, starting in the early 17th century, the type of painter who can be described as a “learned genius” starts to develop; and from the beginning of the next, 18th century, this type gradually starts to transform into the subject that can be called a “mad genius” with all the main features of a modern artist. With the introduction of the neo-Platonic Mannerist doctrine of Lomazzo and Federico Zuccari the “learned genius” is now in its embryonic stage of development, differing greatly from the Renaissance painters of an earlier era. The “painter-mystic” is a self-centred person, whose “inner eye” is directly connected through contemplation with the Divine. In the middle of the 17th century, Charles Alphonse du Fresnoy, and especially Giovanni Pietro Bellori, by synthesizing Platonic and Aristotelian ideas, introduce us to the painter who possesses genius. He is freed from Mannerist mysticism and his main goal is to improve the imperfect Nature created by God through mind and reason. And to produce the perfect version of it in art – la belle nature – to achieve the result the artist has constantly developed himself – to learn and observe. The neo-classicist doctrine gradually burdens the genius with certain strict rules to follow; a process that is referred to here as “taming the genius”. So by the end of the 17th century, it is possible to talk about the “learned (but tamed) genius” – a noble, well-taught, reasonable and aesthetically high-minded artist. At the beginning of 18th century changes start occurring in the theoretical art paradigm, starting with Jean-Baptiste Du Bos and his Reflexions critiques sur la poesie et sur la peinture , written in 1719. This marks a new beginning in the development of the painter-genius figure and undoubtedly has significant influence on the writings that will follow on same subject. Du Bos starts to depart from the “reason-centred” painter, emphasizing the moment of sensory perception as the main criteria in the art of painting. There are two main differences from earlier times. Firstly, the author is now talking about a person who already is genius rather than possessing genius, as was the understanding earlier. Secondly, the person is already born a genius, which means that this quality is no longer taught. There aren’t any strict rules to harass the individual inventiveness and creativity of the artist. In the middle of 18th century many theoreticians, such as Jean le Rond d’Alembert, Etienne de Condillac, Voltaire etc, emphasized such important and very individualistic qualities of the painter as inventiveness, imagination, originality, enthusiasm. And they started to connect these to the centuries-old Platonic idea of poetic fury – furor poeticus – a state of mind in which the artist is almost maddened, insane and fully spontaneous while creating art. Denis Diderot is the first author who says outright that a painter-genius “is mad” ( qu‘il est fou ) and in doing so summons up the ideas of his predecessors. One could say that the different qualities mentioned above have guided the theoretical art narrative to the point where we can talk about the “mad genius”, who is recognized as the creator of art and this is the point where the modern painter-genius, whom we know today, comes to life.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52089,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Baltic Journal of Art History\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"67-88\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.12697/BJAH.2016.11.04\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Baltic Journal of Art History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12697/BJAH.2016.11.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ART\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Baltic Journal of Art History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12697/BJAH.2016.11.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文的目的是研究与艺术和有关画家的理论和美学观点,主要是在法国传统,从17世纪初到18世纪中期,从Gian Paolo Lomazzo的作品开始,以Denis Diderot的观点结束。这篇文章的目的是展示,从17世纪早期开始,可以被描述为“博学的天才”的画家是如何开始发展的;从接下来的18世纪开始,这种类型逐渐开始转变为可以被称为“疯狂天才”的主题,具有现代艺术家的所有主要特征。随着Lomazzo和Federico Zuccari的新柏拉图主义风格主义的引入,“博学的天才”现在处于发展的萌芽阶段,与早期文艺复兴时期的画家有很大的不同。“画家-神秘主义者”是一个以自我为中心的人,他的“内心之眼”通过沉思与神直接相连。在17世纪中叶,Charles Alphonse du Fresnoy,特别是Giovanni Pietro Bellori,通过综合柏拉图和亚里士多德的思想,向我们介绍了拥有天才的画家。他从矫饰主义的神秘主义中解脱出来,他的主要目标是通过思想和理性来改善上帝创造的不完美的自然。为了在艺术中创造出完美的自然——美丽的自然——为了达到这个结果,艺术家不断地发展自己——学习和观察。新古典主义学说逐渐加重了天才必须遵守的严格规则的负担;这个过程在这里被称为“驯服天才”。因此,到17世纪末,可以谈论“博学(但驯服)的天才”——一位高贵、受过良好教育、理性、审美高尚的艺术家。18世纪初,理论艺术范式开始发生变化,始于让-巴蒂斯特·杜·博斯和他在1719年写的《关于诗歌和绘画的反思》。这标志着天才画家形象发展的一个新开端,毫无疑问,这对随后的同类作品产生了重大影响。杜博斯开始脱离“以理性为中心”的画家,强调将感官知觉的瞬间作为绘画艺术的主要标准。与早期相比,现在有两个主要区别。首先,作者现在谈论的是一个已经是天才的人,而不是像之前的理解那样拥有天才。其次,这个人天生就是天才,这意味着这种品质不再是教出来的。没有任何严格的规则来干扰艺术家的个人创造力和创造力。在18世纪中期,许多理论家,如让·勒朗德·达朗贝尔、艾蒂安·德·孔迪亚克、伏尔泰等,都强调了画家的创造性、想象力、独创性和热情等重要的和非常个人主义的品质。他们开始将这些与几个世纪以来柏拉图式的诗意愤怒(furor poeticus)联系起来,这是一种精神状态,艺术家在创作艺术时几乎是疯狂的,疯狂的,完全自发的。丹尼斯·狄德罗(Denis Diderot)是第一个直截了当地说天才画家“疯了”(quil est four)的作家,他这样做唤起了他前辈的思想。可以说,上述不同的品质引导了理论艺术叙事,我们可以谈论“疯狂的天才”,他被认为是艺术的创造者,这是我们今天所知道的现代画家天才的生活。
The goal of the article is to examine the theoretical and aesthetical views related to art and concerning painters, mainly in the French tradition, from the early 17th to the mid-18th century, starting with works by Gian Paolo Lomazzo and ending with the viewpoints of Denis Diderot. Using different examples from the texts of the key authors of their day, the article’s aim is to show how, starting in the early 17th century, the type of painter who can be described as a “learned genius” starts to develop; and from the beginning of the next, 18th century, this type gradually starts to transform into the subject that can be called a “mad genius” with all the main features of a modern artist. With the introduction of the neo-Platonic Mannerist doctrine of Lomazzo and Federico Zuccari the “learned genius” is now in its embryonic stage of development, differing greatly from the Renaissance painters of an earlier era. The “painter-mystic” is a self-centred person, whose “inner eye” is directly connected through contemplation with the Divine. In the middle of the 17th century, Charles Alphonse du Fresnoy, and especially Giovanni Pietro Bellori, by synthesizing Platonic and Aristotelian ideas, introduce us to the painter who possesses genius. He is freed from Mannerist mysticism and his main goal is to improve the imperfect Nature created by God through mind and reason. And to produce the perfect version of it in art – la belle nature – to achieve the result the artist has constantly developed himself – to learn and observe. The neo-classicist doctrine gradually burdens the genius with certain strict rules to follow; a process that is referred to here as “taming the genius”. So by the end of the 17th century, it is possible to talk about the “learned (but tamed) genius” – a noble, well-taught, reasonable and aesthetically high-minded artist. At the beginning of 18th century changes start occurring in the theoretical art paradigm, starting with Jean-Baptiste Du Bos and his Reflexions critiques sur la poesie et sur la peinture , written in 1719. This marks a new beginning in the development of the painter-genius figure and undoubtedly has significant influence on the writings that will follow on same subject. Du Bos starts to depart from the “reason-centred” painter, emphasizing the moment of sensory perception as the main criteria in the art of painting. There are two main differences from earlier times. Firstly, the author is now talking about a person who already is genius rather than possessing genius, as was the understanding earlier. Secondly, the person is already born a genius, which means that this quality is no longer taught. There aren’t any strict rules to harass the individual inventiveness and creativity of the artist. In the middle of 18th century many theoreticians, such as Jean le Rond d’Alembert, Etienne de Condillac, Voltaire etc, emphasized such important and very individualistic qualities of the painter as inventiveness, imagination, originality, enthusiasm. And they started to connect these to the centuries-old Platonic idea of poetic fury – furor poeticus – a state of mind in which the artist is almost maddened, insane and fully spontaneous while creating art. Denis Diderot is the first author who says outright that a painter-genius “is mad” ( qu‘il est fou ) and in doing so summons up the ideas of his predecessors. One could say that the different qualities mentioned above have guided the theoretical art narrative to the point where we can talk about the “mad genius”, who is recognized as the creator of art and this is the point where the modern painter-genius, whom we know today, comes to life.
期刊介绍:
THE BALTIC JOURNAL OF ART HISTORY is an official publication of the Department of Art History of the Institute of History and Archaeology of the University of Tartu. It is published by the University of Tartu Press in cooperation with the Department of Art History. The concept of the journal is to ask contributions from different authors whose ideas and research findings in terms of their content and high academic quality invite them to be published. We are mainly looking forward to lengthy articles of monographic character as well as shorter pieces where the issues raised or the new facts presented cover topics that have not yet been shed light on or open up new art geographies.