(193)
|
| 重新評估媚俗──文化他者 |
| A Reassessment of Kitsch, Cultural Other |
 |
| 作者 |
金嬉英 |
| Author |
Hee-young Kim |
| 關鍵詞 |
媚俗、
前衛、
自主性、
原創性、
流行文化、
科技、
主體性、
轉變、
媚俗批判、
文化工業、
非同一性
|
| Keywords |
Kitsch,
avant-garde,
autonomy,
originality,
popular culture,
tech-nology,
subjectivity,
transformation,
kitsch criticism,
culture industry,
non-identity
|
| 摘要 |
儘管有許多努力持續著重新劃分藝術與文化的界線，在當代藝術實踐的手法中，對於原創性的傳統概念卻是堅持不變的。關於原創性的論述當中，將那些使用複製手法所做出次級藝術的各式作品，普遍稱作媚俗，或是相對於前衛的「後衛」。如此的分類方法，顯示了現代主義與大眾文化，兩者互為對立關係的爭論議題。由於簡易的內容與平實的價格，大眾文化具備無人能抵的吸引力，同時也成了現代主義最強大的威脅。此一威脅激起某些論述體系將大眾文化定位為現代主義的文化他者。本篇論文視被邊緣化的媚俗範疇為爭論場域，進而檢視壓抑媚俗的論述。本文將分析此種捍衛藝術原創性與自主性，以及相對地把媚俗貶低為次等且危險的文化類別之思維架購。格林伯格將媚俗等同於工業化的附屬產物之概念，逐漸演變成倡導藝術自主性的論調。法蘭克福學派的學者們，特別是阿多諾及霍克海默，則提出近似的文化批判。他們將焦點放在大眾文化，諸如電影，廣播，以及電視，而非聚焦於藝術作品，批判解析了大眾文化的體系，並且理論化了媚俗的無所不在所引發的負面意涵。另外一方面，有些評論者意識到在文化發展當中，大眾文化的成長將會開啟更多的可能性。班雅明和羅森伯格認為大眾文化中，社會文化的動力彰顯了在現實與主體裡頭持續轉變的潛能。他們認為科技的進步改變了創作的狀態，同時也成就了媒材之間的直接互動。藉由詳細審閱對於媚俗的矛盾觀點，本文希冀能夠重新評估那些「汲取外緣力量」的藝術。
（翻譯：李鎧伊） |
| Abstract |
Despite continuous efforts to redraw the boundaries between art and culture, the conventional concept of originality has persisted in approaches to the practice of contemporary art. In the discourse of originality, various forms of lesser arts that employ the method of replication have been referred to as kitsch, or “rear-guard,” the opposite of avant-garde. This categorization points to the contested issue regarding the oppositional relation between modernism and mass culture. With its easily accessible content and financial affordability, mass culture has become both an irresistible attraction and a most powerful threat to modernism. This threat has instigated a discursive system that has situated mass culture as a cultural other of modernism. Taking the marginalized category of kitsch as the area of contention, this paper examines the critical debate on the subject, which intends to win over the legitimacy of the discourse on art and culture. It analyzes the conceptual framework that defends originality and autonomy in art and, conversely, degrades kitsch as an inferior and dangerous cultural category. Greenberg's concept of kitsch as a by-product of industrialization evolved into the criticism that advocates the autonomy of art. The Frankfurt School scholars, particularly Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, practiced comparable cultural critiques. Focusing on mass culture such as film, radio, and television, instead of art works, they critically analyzed the system of mass culture and theorized the negative implications of the ubiquitous presence of kitsch. Some critics, on the other hand, perceived the growth of mass culture as opening possibilities in cultural development. Walter Benjamin and Harold Rosenberg asserted the socio-cultural dynamics of mass culture underlining the potential for continual transformation in reality and in the subject. They acknowledged that technological advances changed the condition of creation and enabled unmediated interactions between media. By scrutinizing conflicting views on kitsch, this paper intends to reassess arts that draw “the forces of the outside.” |
|
|
|
