学术抄袭新发现:《艺术的概念衍变》盗自何处?
发起人:heyheyhey  回复数:0   浏览数:2232   最后更新:2007/10/01 18:45:49 by
[楼主] heyheyhey 2007-10-01 18:45:49
学术抄袭新发现:《艺术的概念衍变》盗自何处?
转帖美术同盟


学术抄袭新发现:《艺术的概念衍变》盗自何处?
[作 者]桑 耀 武
原文引自北京社会科学院网站:[url]http://bass.gov.cn/common/bookcontent2.jsp?type=101&id=571

中国美术大学的范景中教授在邵宏的《美术史的观念》(中国美术学院出版社2003年10月版)一书的“序言”中写道:“在当代,知识分子所做的种种不负责任的事情中又多了一件,即写一些空洞无物的大作,让求知的读者枉费心神,浪费掉重于尺璧的珍贵光阴。在这种学术空疏的气氛中写作,一部呕心沥血的作品,则往往明珠暗投,被淹没在出版物的海洋中。”范景中教授的这种感叹确实道出了当代某些知识分子写作中的一种实情,但我在这里想再补充“这种种不负责任的事情中”的另一件更不负责任、更自欺欺人、更无耻的事情,那就是知识分子的“学术抄袭”现象。近年来这种现象被揭露的不少,关于这种现象的讨论也颇多,这里不拟对这种现象做空泛的议论,只是想告诉人们这种现象又一次在学术界不幸地发生了,并被堂而皇之地当作“呕心沥血的作品”出版了。我所指的就是邵宏这部范景中教授表达了“钦佩和敬意”的“呕心沥血的作品”。
我不敢说也不能说邵宏的《美术史的观念》全都是从别人那里抄来的,这样说是不负责任的,因为我并没有把这本书全部读完,只因我对艺术的概念演变问题有一点兴趣而首先读了其中的《艺术的概念衍变》。当我发现该书第三章“艺术的概念衍变”几乎完全照搬了保罗·奥斯卡·克里斯特莱尔(Paul Oskar Kristeller)的《现代艺术体系》(The modern system of the Arts)时,我就再也无法读下去了。克里斯特莱尔的文章发表于Journal of the History of Ideas, 12(1951), pp.465-527; 12(1952), pp.17-46。该文也被收录在W. E. 肯尼克(W. E.Kennick)所编的《艺术与哲学》(Art and Philosophy)中,该书1979年由纽约圣马丁出版社(St. Martin Press, New York, 1979)出版,该文集收录的第一篇文章就是克里斯特莱尔(Paul Oskar Kristeller)的《现代艺术体系》,本人所看到的克里斯特莱尔的文章属于这个版本的文集(这部书的英文版可以在北京的国家图书馆外借库里借到)。我在这里做这些交待,是想说明,克里斯特莱尔的文章发表在邵宏的文章之前半个世纪,从而时间老人的眼睛充分地证明是邵宏抄袭克里斯特莱尔,而不是克里斯特莱尔抄袭邵宏。再强调一下,克氏的文章发表于20世纪50年代初,邵宏的书出版于21世纪初。

邵宏是如何抄袭克里斯特莱尔的《现代艺术体系》的?克里斯特莱尔的文章共有9个部分,邵宏的《艺术的概念衍变》共7个部分,他不是从头到尾全抄,而是掐头去尾抄。他掐掉了《现代艺术体系》的第1部分和第9部分,因此邵宏的文章变成了7部分。邵宏文中的第1部分有所删节地抄自克氏文章的第2部分,这一部分删得多一点,第2部分也有所删节地抄自克氏的第3部分,从第3部分到第7部分除删节了少数句子外几乎全部抄自克里斯特莱尔的《现代艺术体系》第4-8部分。克里斯特莱尔论文的第9部分是对现代艺术概念生成的总结性理论思考,抄袭者可能觉得不合适就没有要这一部分。邵宏的书是以章节出现的,为了在章节之间有个“承上启下”,他在《艺术的概念衍变》的末尾加了一个属于他自己的“尾巴”,除了这条可有可无的尾巴外,此文全部来自克里斯特莱尔的《现代艺术体系》。

  据我所知,克氏的文章尚未译成中文,读者们不好找。为了证明以上所说的真确性,也为了让一时难以找到原文的读者能够两相对照,只好不嫌麻烦(抄录英文“原文”)和恶心(抄录邵宏的“大作”),同时连贯性地抄录克里斯特莱尔“原文”和邵宏“大作”的六段文字如下,以飨读者。

The greatest contribution to the history of our problem in the interval between Baumgarten and Kant came from Mendelssohn, Sulzer, and Herder. Mendelssohn, who was well acquainted with French and English writings on the subject, demanded in a famous article that the fine art (painting, sculpture, music, the dance, and architecture) and belles lettres (poetry and eloquence) should be reduced to some common principle better than imitation, and thus was the first among the Germans to formulate a system of the fine arts. Shortly afterwards, in a book review, he criticized Baumgarten and Meier for not carried out the program of their new science, aesthetics. They wrote as if they had been thinking exclusively in terms of poetry and literature, whereas aesthetic principle should be formulated in such a way as to apply to the visual arts and music as well. In his annotations to Lessing’s Laokoon, published long after his death, Mendelssohn persistently criticizes Lessing for not giving any consideration to music and to the system of arts as a whole; we have seen how Lessing in the fragmentary notes for a continuation of the laokoon, tried to meet the criticism. Mendelssohn also formulated a doctrine of the three faculties of the soul corresponding to the three basic realms of goodness, truth and beauty, thus continuing the work of the Scottish philosophers. He did not work out an explicit theory of aesthetics, but under the impact of the French and English authors he indicated the direction in which German aesthetics was to develop from Baumgarten to Kant.

(克里斯特莱尔:《现代艺术体系》第8部分第5段,肯尼克编:《艺术与哲学》,第28页。)

  从鲍姆加登到康德之间,对西方艺术观念史有重要贡献的人物是摩西·孟德尔松、苏尔泽和赫尔德。孟德尔松十分熟悉法国和英国作家们对文艺的讨论,因此他在一篇文章里要求美的艺术(绘画、雕塑、音乐、舞蹈、建筑)和美文(belles lettres),即诗歌和修辞术应该统一在某种共同原则之下,这个共同原则不应该是模仿原则。由此,孟德尔松被看作是第一位建立美的艺术体系的德国学者。不久他在一篇书评里又批评鲍姆加登和迈耶没有坚持他们的新科学——美学计划。他们只讨论诗歌和文学,这是不对的;应当将美学原则运用到视觉艺术和音乐中去。孟德尔松在给莱辛《拉奥孔》作的注解里又批评莱辛没有将音乐纳入研究范围,也没有考虑一个完整的艺术体系。莱辛在后来准备《拉奥孔》的续篇的笔记里,曾表示要考虑孟氏的批评。此外,孟氏还针对真、善、美系统,构思了心灵三官能理论,这也继续了苏格兰学派的工作。他虽然没有提出一个明确的美学理论,但在法国和英国思想家的影响下,他起到了使德国美学从鲍姆加登到康德的桥梁作用。

(邵宏:《艺术的概念衍变》第7部分,《美术史的观念》,第70-71页。)

What Mendelssohn had merely set forth in a general outline and program, the Swiss thinker Sulzer, who was well versed in French literature, but spent the greater part of his life in Northern Germany, was able to develop in a more systematic and elaborate fashion. Sulzer began his literary activity with a few short philosophical articles in which his interest for aesthetics was already apparent, and in which he also learned toward the conception of an aesthetic faculty of the soul separate from the intellectual and moral faculties, a conception in whose development Mendelssohn and the philosopher Tetens also took the part. Some years later, Sulzer was prompted by the example of Lacombe’s little dictionary of the fine arts to compile a similar dictionary in German on a much large scale. This General Theory of Fine Arts, which appeared in several editions, has been disparaged on account of its pedantic arrangement, but it is clear, comprehensive and learned, and had a considerable importance in its time. The work covers all the fine arts, not only poetry and eloquence, but also music and the visual arts, and thus represents the first attempt to carry out on a large scale the program formulated by Baumgarten and Mendelssohn. Thanks to its wide diffusion, Sulzer’s work went a long way to acquaint the German public with the idea that all the fine arts are related and connected with each other. Sulzer’s influence extended also to France, for when the great Encyclopédie was published in Switzerland in a second edition, many additions were based on his General Theory, including the article on aesthetics and the section on the fine arts.

(克里斯特莱尔:《现代艺术体系》第8部分第6段,肯尼克编:《艺术与哲学》,第28-29页。)

  孟德尔松粗略涉足的领域,后来由苏尔泽深入下去。苏尔泽对法国文学十分熟悉,但是一生中大部分时间呆在德国北部。他的文学生涯是由写一些哲学短文开始的,在这些短文里就已经显露出他对美学的兴趣,并且有意识地讨论了心灵的美感概念,将其与认识功能和道德感区别开来。后来,由于受拉康伯所编的《美的艺术小词典》影响,苏尔泽打算编一本更大的德文《美的艺术词典》,其中有关美的艺术的总论所具有的综合特征和学术性,在当时有着重要的影响。这部词典不仅包括诗歌和修辞术,同时还涉及音乐和视觉艺术,标志继续着鲍姆加登和孟德尔松的计划,并且规模更大。由于这部词典的广泛传播,使德国公众接受了这么一个观念:所有美的艺术都是相互联系互为补充的。苏尔泽的影响及至法国,当大百科全书在瑞士出第二版时,许多增写的部分都依据苏<
返回页首