Chinese contemporary aesthetics nonaesthetic play their causes毕业论文翻译.docx

Chinese contemporary aesthetics nonaesthetic play their causes毕业论文翻译.docx

《Chinese contemporary aesthetics nonaesthetic play their causes毕业论文翻译.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Chinese contemporary aesthetics nonaesthetic play their causes毕业论文翻译.docx（8页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

Chinesecontemporaryaestheticsnonaestheticplaytheircauses毕业论文翻译

Chinesecontemporaryaestheticsnon-aestheticplaytheircauses

1950-80’sartandaestheticsspiteencounterwinter,butalsoYangboMountainDew,attractedwideinterestwithahighdegreeofenthusiasm,andeventheformationofauniversalaestheticthought.Marginalizationofseriousartandaesthetics,longdeathdifficultchasedifficultamazinglydream.however,infact,Chinesecontemporaryaestheticsboomoccurrednotsimplybecauseoftheartandaestheticsoftheirownsake,butbecauseofitslinktoactasaspecialtimeinChinesecontemporarythinkingorthinkingofpaintingduringthisperiodalayer“aesthetic”color.“aesthetic”hasbecomeanimportantfeatureofthehistoryofideasorlinks.

Chinesecontemporaryartandaestheticsofnon-aestheticplayphenomenoniscloselyrelatedto,ontheonehand,andthecharacteristicsofitsneedofexternalreality,ontheotherhand,aestheticsinherentcharacteristicsintrinsicallylinkeddepthcombingandanalysisofChinesecontemporaryaestheticencounterunderstandingofthehistoryofChinesethoughtthatstagecharacteristics,andliteratureonthemulti-functionalandaestheticshapedinordertoeffectivelycopewiththenatureofartandaestheticconditionshavesignificance.

Whenpeopletalkaboutthetopicofintellectualhistory,artandaestheticsmoreoftenexcludedfromtheoutsideandviceversa,todiscussliteraryandartisticbeautyhours,despitealsocomestoideologicalbackground,butalwaystwodividedclearlyThereasonisverysimple,literatureandart,andaesthetics,historyofbelongingtospecialcategoriesForexample,whenaddressingthe“CulturalRevolution”totheideologicalcourseofthe1980s,peopletendfromovertideologicalemancipationmovement（suchasthepracticeoftestingtruthstandard“discussions）andhumanitariandiscussionsdirectlyenteranimportantstageinmodernChinesethought-”CulturalFever“intermsofthewaveofartandaesthetics,andwasinfullswing,andneverasanintegralpartofthehistoryofideas.Infact,evenbeforethebigdiscussionofthecriterionoftruthalreadygerminationandcontinuedintotheartandaestheticcrazeofthemid-1980s,isitselfanexpressionoftheideologicalemancipationmovementandhumanitariandiscussionsQichaoRoad,“where‘thinking’noneofthecan‘tide’,‘boomers’who,usea‘grace’ofvalueappropriatetotheireraalso.“Mountain”Aesthetics“isthefulltimecareoftheartof”thinking“andaestheticsTide.

Beforetheperiodoftheideologicalemancipationmovement,intellectualfocusonexposingandcriticizingthe“CulturalRevolution”started“GangofFour”,butstillideologicaldiscoursemodeofthe“CulturalRevolution”commenced.“Twowhatevers”isepitomized.<<Practiceisthesolecriterionfortestingtruth>>publishedsixmonthsago,called<<teacher>>alreadyadventofthepureliterarymagazinesofthehighestlevelinChina,openedapreludetothe“scarliterature”Eveninpurelyideologicaltheory,contenthasgonefarbeyondthecriticismofthe“gangoffour”hitanegationofthe“CulturalRevolution”thethedeepeningdevelopmentasa“scarliterature”and“reflectionLiterature,aswellassynchronizationopen-and-coming”Misty“and”StarsExhibition“furtherexpandthedepthholistichistoricalreflectionfromthelevelofhumannatureandhumanexistence.despitetheyearevenbehindthefactioncriticsconferredMistytotheso-called“newaestheticprinciples,theldquo;horndisdainforthespiritofthetimes,butalsodisdaintotheperformanceoftheiremotionstheworldoutsideofthegreatachievements“,notdirectlytoglorifylife,butthepursuitofthesecretoflifeisdissolvedinthemind”,②butthatinitselfisdistinctivetopromoteaspiritofthetimesandallthis,asearlyasinthehumanitarianbefore,hadconcernwiththeofAlienationproblemintheoreticalcirclesoccurwidelyinthefieldofliteratureandart.

“Scarliterature”,“ReflectionLiterature”,“Misty”and“StarsExhibition”normalized“wasareflectionoftheAesthetics”,butthereasonwhy“aesthetic”ratherthan“art”withthenameofthisboomisbecauseofaesthetictheoryatthattimebythe“CulturalRevolution”beforethefirstbigtopicofdiscussionagainralliedtogethertodebutthefallacademicthinkingdiscussion,butasareflectionstartedinearlyinfluenceofthelarge,notlessfavorablethanthoseprevailingliteraryandartisticcreation.thefamousestheticianZhuGuangqian,ZenitanifinancialErTaiGao,etalpublishednumerousarticles,hasgreatlypromotedthediscussionoftheriseoftheChinesethoughtacademicfromthepoliticalleveltothelevelofhumanityandhistoryintothedeep,directlycontributedtothehumanitarianAlienation.

Researchintermsofthemorepurelyaesthetic,GuangqianIn1979,thefirstprofessionalChinesecontemporaryaestheticspublication,editedbythephilosophyofaestheticsResearchCenteroftheChineseAcademyofSocialScienceslarge>>1978<<viewpointsandmethodsofaesthetichistorySeriesadvent.1980<<aesthetics>><<theaestheticsasked>>Bulletin,literatureLiteratureandArtTheoryResearchEditor>><<aestheticsFORUMbeganpublishingthestudyofaestheticsintoclimax.organizedbytheMinistryofEducation,thefoundingofthefirsttimesincecollegeaestheticsteachereducationclassesGuangqian,WangZhaowen,CaiYi,LiZehoutaughtandtrainedalargenumberofaestheticfaculty,in1981,oftheimportantworksofaestheticclimaxbasicallyahomogeneous,suchasZhuGuangqian<<TanLetters>>casesBaiHua<<aestheticswalking>>theChiangKongyang<<>>ofGermanclassicalaesthetics,WangZhaowen<<IntroductiontoAesthetics>>calledAesthetics“flag”and“mark”thecourseoftheUnitedStates>><<（ofwhichthefirstthreechaptersof1980<<aesthetics>>secondfirstpublished）.theseseeminglysimpleaestheticsacademicevent,actuallycontainaprofoundideologicalsignificance.purposeofschooldevelopment,theaestheticdiscussioncomparedfifty-sixdecadesonbehalfofthediscussionthereisnofundamentalchanges,isstilllargelyobjectivefaction,the“subjectivesend”,“subjectiveandobjectivethecentralallocation”and“practiceschool”division.yetitcausedinfullswingrepercussionstogetherwithliteraryandartisticcreation,studyitsorigins,butbecauseof“aestheticactsasanimportantwingoftheideologicalemancipationmovement,orsaidtoplaytheroleofideologicalenlightenment”.ideologicalenlightenment......diggingtowardthedepthsofthenation’shistoryandculture,“theyformedlater“culturalfever.”,thereforeLiZehoubelievesthat“IfBroadlyspeaking,culturalhotinsideincludingaestheticshotoraestheticshotpreludetoorpartoftheculturalhot.”<<beautycourse>>impact,thereisabreakthroughinthesenseofthewayofthinkingandtheacademicpath.subjectivepracticethatinsucharichacademicpathandmethodofrefreshing,totheintellectualacademiaexcitementandinspirationinMarxistdiscoursestructuremoreeffectivebreakthroughthetraditionalepistemologicalevenontologicaldogmathinking,wasundoubtedlythetheLiZehousubjectivitypracticalphilosophy“.cornerstoneasLiZehou’stheoryofhistoryandculture,animportantcluetotheformationof”culturalfever“andideologicalsourcesofwasforawhilethemajorityofyoungpeoplearerespectedLee’stheory“CultureFever”strickensomeradicalviewscritical,butsecondtononeinthefieldofMarxisminChina,untilthis“subjectivepracticalphilosophy,theyfromitsaestheticresearchundertheinfluenceoftheaestheticcraze,someliterarycriticism,butalsobytheliterarystephumanityresearch.

Ifyousaid,thesignificantideologicalemancipationmovementinthemeaningofthe“liberation”isoftenunderstoodmainlyReplyideologicalcontentandideasbeforethe“CulturalRevolution”inclusivewidth,thenthepotentialwaveofartandaesthetics“liberation”,iscompletelyasharponrushaword,late1970s,early1980s,thefieldofChinesethought,artisticcreationandaestheticdiscussion,withitsuniqueformofideologicalhistoryoftheice-breakingmission.“aesthetics”thinking“,orbymeansofartisticcreationandaestheticstudiesandideologicalself-examinationasthenatureoftheeventsofthehistoryofideas,makingartandaestheticsboomin1980s,orsincetheendofthe”CulturalRevolution“to”culturalhotstageofthehistoryofChinesethoughthasbeenwithaestheticcolorcharacteristicsabundantlyclear.then,awaveofartandaesthetics,andhowithadbecometheintellectualhistoryevents,andevenactasalinkinthedevelopmentofthehistoryofideaswhichhasahistoryofaspecificideologicalbackgroundcauses.

Peopleintermsofliteratureandart,despitethe“CulturalRevolution”which,even17yearsbeforethe“CulturalRevolution”,thehardesthitinthefieldsofliteratureandartsisaleftistideologyroute,butalsobecauseofit,makingthe“CulturalRevolution”isparticularlysensitiveforadministrativemeasurestointerfereartisticcreation,whichinturnledtothe“tolerance”ofliterary,artisticandliterarytheoryinnovationspecial,thatithasbecomeagoodbunkeremergingthinkingonaestheticresearch,continuedforeightofthe“CulturalRevolution”yearsoftheaestheticdiscussion（1956-1964）,isnotonlyregardedasanimportantstageofthedevelopmentofmodernChineseaesthetics,andwasseenasaleftistideologyduringthe“miracle”Althoughthisdi