论文部分内容阅读
这个题目看起来好像绕口令.可能分开讨论会清楚一点。前半部分是理论家要不要会画画的问题。讨论之前有个小问题要明确.就是什么样的人算“美术理论家”?他们是干什么的?我心目中的美术理论家,至少应该读过一些书.对美术史有足够丰富的知识:至少应该能够运用已有的知识提出新的问题或新的角度.并能做出自圆其说的解答:至少应该有部拿得出手的著作.不论薄厚得有自己的研究领域和观点.见解不要求多么一鸣惊人.至少有自己的视角.不人云亦云.也就是说.如果只是掌握史实和一些通常的研究方法.最后得出一个不疼不痒的结论.顶多算是美术理论从业者,,如果说理论家是树.从业者顶多算种子,我们每年毕业好多种子.却没有几棵树。
This topic looks like a tongue-in-tongue and may be separated from the discussion. The first half is the question of whether or not theorists should draw. There is a small problem before the discussion to be clear.What kind of person is the “art theorist”? What are they doing? My art theorist, at least some books should be read. Art history is rich enough Knowledge: At least you should be able to use your existing knowledge to ask new questions or new points of view, and be self-explanatory: there should be at least some books to win, regardless of their own areas of study and opinions. At least have their own point of view. Not saying, that is to say, if only to grasp the historical facts and some of the usual research methods. Finally reached a non-painless conclusion. At best regarded as art theory practitioners, if that Theorists are trees, and practitioners count as seeds at most, and we graduate many seeds each year, but few trees.