Article from WeChat public account:See the ideal (ID: ikanlixiang), author: Hou Chen, from FIG title: Oriental IC
Li was born again, and this time it is no longer a slogan of the “golden sentence” style, but a large paragraph of holistic discourse. It may be far more than the sum of the previous words.
In the highly praised and controversial stage of the singularity, and the highly acclaimed “debate of the gods” Huang Zhizhong confronted, Li Xuan was completely crushed and won all the colors. In this context, this “debate” is not burning. Will not work.
Under this enthusiasm, everything is just like the conversation between Xu Zhiyuan and Ma Dong. Everything is just like the conversation between the decent and the frankness of all the whitewashes in our lives.
What do I say in the face of this debate?
In order to launch my point of view most directly, I intend to start by facing this issue.
If I am Huang Zhizhong, how will I face it? The art gallery is on fire, save the famous painting or save the cat?
I will be angry. Not doing anger for the stage effect, I am really angry.
Some topics can be discussed, and some topics are not. Not because this isIn a debate field, we can put everything out to show its “different perspectives.” For example, the square “the high efficiency of the massacre is a kind of evil”, and the anti-party “the high efficiency of the massacre has nothing to do with good and evil.” This is an issue that cannot be discussed.
Rescuing famous paintings or saving cats is also the same. The program group put forward this debate. Through internal review and discussion, it may be smug that it is a good topic that can cause problems and collisions. Then no one in the audience was angrily left, and no one of the debaters was furious. This is a massacre of art. This is a massacre of human values.
It may be a collective act of the most degrading art in human history since the birth of distant rock paintings, where art classics begin to compare with the life of a cat.
Like Li said in his argument that Da Vinci would have moved to tears if he knew that his painting saved a cat. He can only say that he is a consistent slogan of talk show actors. Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo are not only the two most arrogant masters of the Renaissance Florence, Da Vinci’s love for the Mona Lisa is hard to say. Even after the painting has been completed, Da Vinci is still excusing to continue to improve the details and to leave the painting for a longer time in order to delay delivery. If he knows that this painting is a torch for saving a cat, he is afraid that even the coffin board will be broken.
If you are rude, The artist can even give up his life for his work, even if it is the life of a cat?
We revisit the literature of the golden age, in all the prophetic predictions, for the continuation and preservation of the great culture of civilization, people go on and offer their own lives. And today, in a set-up debate, a famous painting needs to be taken in conjunction with the life of a cat.
This is how timid and arrogant.
We lived in a time when nihilists needed to be careful to hide themselves, and they needed to be ashamed to reveal their emptiness. To this day, we can live in a nihilism that can be popular, but instead can ridicule the era of sarcastic idealists.
This shouldn’t be irritating, shouldn’t it be blushing?
At this time, when we talk about decent, the value of a famous painting can be compared with the life of a cat, the value of human beings has been completely negated. Where else do we get “decent”?
A disguised idealist
Don’t be jealous, I am not a person who hates animals. I have cats for a long time. I care about cats and cats. I keep cats like me. But I also understand very well that I love my cat again. Compared with the value of a world famous painting, it is almost completely comparable in scale and manner. If I sacrifice my cat, plus the sculpture that I can save La Ocon not to be destroyed, I will not leave.
Therefore, Huang Zhizhong made a big mistake. He is not wrong in the debate. He is talking about the high level in the elite to hear the so-called “far crying.”
His “big mistake” is that he does not understand the value of art works –
He has no resonance with art works, so he can only describe the “poor” of art works with inappropriate metaphors. He hopes to describe the works of art more pitifully than a cat and win the sympathy of the audience. Therefore, if people have more “advanced” sympathy, they should be more sympathetic to art.
God, as a nihilist of this era, is there a qualification for sympathy for art? Sympathize with yourself.
Li Huan as a nihilist is still good luck, then when you look at the reader as a nihilist, when deconstructing and “don’t care”, which one is not lamenting that the fortunes are not good, the world is unfair, the people around are stupid, and the society is too sinister. Have to accept ordinary, willing to be mediocre.
Standing in this position, a poor cat is still qualified. Poor a famous painting, how to match?
The statue of David was born in Michelangelo’s chiseling moment, in which the power and spirit of condensation in the chisel, fearing that a mediocre person could not be born once in his life. Even if the statue of David is now badly ground to powder, the spectators can regret it, but sympathy? How to match?
So when Huang Zhizhong said that we want to listen to the “distant crying” of Bada Shanren, I think this is his big mistake. Bada Shanren wants to cry for this. It is also crying for the destruction of the work. Is it because we cry for us? Can you imagine that you areThe family made a model, smashed by the bear child, and you cry because of your pains. The bear child suddenly began to say, I really sympathize with you, I heard your crying. What is your mood?
Would you like to assemble a rough model, Da Vinci’s painting Mona Lisa? We sympathize with Da Vinci? How to match?
If a person really has an ideal for art works, it should have been clear for a long time. The value of famous paintings is that it is a glorious moment of human history. It is the essence of the continuation of humanity from generation to generation. It begins to compare it with a cat. Who is more pitiful, high in the land, we can be compassionate as a gesture. This kind of gesture is already a big insult to art works. From this perspective, what about ideals?
I hate false idealists more than nihilists, because it is precisely them, these decent people who don’t care, make the ideals more and more awkward.
Artless Ages
Do I hate nihilism? I hate that they talk about value, but often reveal their despicable colors.
The beginning of Li’s birthday made me angry, and art is to live in people’s hearts? What is the reason? I don’t want to express anger emotionally here, let me give you an example.
If art is to live in our hearts, it is probably living in a “concept” and “expression” way. I can say: Turner (Turner)< The storm series of /span> shows the “toughness” of people. I can even tell you that Turner used the captain to tie himself to the mast to experience the storm. This is “resilient” from both the story and the semantics.
Snow Storm- Steam-Boat off