D O C U M E N T

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

ART CENTERS AND PERIPHERAL ART
[A LECTURE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
HAMBURG, OCTOBER 15, 1982]

nicos hadjinicolaou

The title of my talk is “Art Centers and Peripheral Art.” The subject to
which I have assigned this title touches several aspects of our discipline.
I would briefl y like to raise several questions which have led me to the
discussion of this topic.

1. Naturally, the most important, most complicated question for us art
历史学家, but I believe also for historians in general—a problem, 经过
道路, which we shall never “solve,” but answer differently depend-
ing on our points of view—is the following: how and why does form
改变?1 Which available tools or means make it possible for art histori-
ans to capture these changes?

I think that the point I am hinting at here with “art centers and
peripheral art” touches on this question: in the relationship of center
and periphery, in the effect of an art center, and in the dissemination
of its production to the periphery. In inundating and overpowering the
art production of the periphery, the history of art is also being made.2

This has been, no doubt, the central question at least of German-language art history since
the end of the 19th century (Heinrich Wölffl in, August Schmarsow, Alois Riegl).
这, 也, cannot be emphasized enough. The history of art is created from (除其他外
因素) 这 (unequal) interrelationship of periphery and center. Just as misleading as it
is to want to understand a history of art only from the point of view of the center (即使
it is done with cultivated impassiveness), it would be exactly as misleading to understand
the history of art as a static juxtaposition of center and periphery. 然而, what is being

https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00267

119

2. A second question that arises from this subject is that of art geogra-
物理层: periphery and center, are they not also geographical terms?3

It is the purpose of my talk to plead for a revival and reorientation

of art geography in the sense that a dimension should be taken into
account which has received too little consideration until now, 即
one that could be designated with the troublesome expression “political
art geography.”

3. A third question, very closely connected with the earlier ones: 这
problem of discontinuity in history, for us, in the history of art.

I said that an art historian is constantly confronted with the ques-

tion of historical development (which does not absolutely have to result
in evolutionism).

I think that it would be helpful to consider the cases of discontinu-
ity alongside attempts to access history by means of studying historical
continuity, to search also in the other direction, in order to arrive at the
same objective, which is capturing, grasping, the course of history.

And what would offer an easier access to this matter than the analy-
sis of the unequal relationship of center and periphery, the consideration
of the frequently powerful penetration of the art production of a center
into the periphery?

4. The fourth question is already asked, by mentioning an unequal rela-
tionship between periphery and center: it is the question of the resistance
到, and/or the accommodation of, art production in the periphery to the
art production of the powerful center.

5. Which presents us with the fifth question, formulated in this way:
is art produced in the periphery also a peripheral art, in the derogatory
感觉, as I formulated it polemically in the title of my presentation?
Viewed etymologically, the periphery may be a fringe subject,

pleaded for here is that we will one day (until the desired larger syntheses become possible)
change the perspective and will also observe historical developments from the point of view
of the periphery. 一个可以, 当然, pose the question of whether it makes any sense at
all to demand of institutions or institutionalized art history of the center that they will aban-
don the point of view of the center. That is something we cannot really expect. 一个可以
plead for it nevertheless and convince at least a few individual researchers of the fruitful-
ness of such a change in perspective.
“Geographical terms” in the sense of a politically, sociohistorically oriented geography.
Purely morphologically speaking, the globe does not have a “natural” “center” on its surface.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

120

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

peripheral is that which is located at the fringes, upon which no value
judgment is expressed for the time being. 仍然, the word has never been
free of another meaning: that which was located at the fringes was also
viewed as inferior. It is very obvious that the word peripheral does have
this double meaning, and my reading of Der Spiegel after my arrival in
Hamburg four days ago provided me with additional evidence.

In an article in the edition from October 11, 1982, about the efforts

of the West German Foreign Minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, 后
and in spite of his reappointment as Foreign Minister in the Kohl gov-
政府, “to play the old Genscher,” Der Spiegel wrote:

On the couch in the Maisonette Suite on the 29th floor of the UN
Plaza Hotel, his face brightens up as soon as a colleague pays his
respects in the glare of the TV floodlights. This is how he manages,
in Genscher style and without any special effort, sixteen foreign
ministers in thirty-six hours—among them Gromyko, the Ameri-
can George Shultz, China’s Huang Hua, and East Berlin’s Oskar
Fischer. “Peripheral schedules,” Genscher instructs his diplomats,
would have to be rejected or canceled. Among the things which
do not contribute any splendor, and were canceled for this reason,
was a dinner with six African foreign ministers.

Without doubt, the derogatory sense of peripheral is clear here: periph-
eral is that which has no splendor and, 所以, does not contribute
any glamor, that which is relatively insignificant, second-rate, 省级
in the derogatory sense. Naturally, that definitely includes African for-
eign ministers, because Africa, as everybody knows, is a European
province.

6. A sixth problem, which belongs in this context, is undoubtedly the
problem of Eurocentrism, or perhaps more correctly, that of Euro-
American centrism.

When I talk about art centers and peripheral art, I would also like

to touch on the following fact, namely the prevailing conviction in the
United States and in Europe (这里, the West and East are understood as
one entity) that everything which is produced outside of these regions
is simply inferior and, 最好, could be viewed favorably as the artistic
expression of mentally impaired adults or as “nice” folk art.

Can we apply the old relationship of capital (or metropolis) 和

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

121

province to this world dimension?4 Could we say that Europe and the
United States are for Africa or Latin America that which Berlin was for
the Mark Brandenburg (Margraviate of Brandenburg) or Paris for
Normandy in the second half of the 19th century?

7. 最后, a seventh question, which originates with the problems of
art reception. During the past fifteen years, we have entertained very
many thoughts about the reception of art and literature, 特别
in the study of literature. Reception theory and reception history have
almost achieved the status of fashion vocabulary. 今天, the flood
appears to have somewhat ebbed away.

I am convinced that the series of questions suggested by the term
reception will play a groundbreaking role in the future for the develop-
ment of art history as a discipline. Because in art history, we have not
yet by a long shot made use of the approaches of reception theory and
the possible models of reception history. If we consider what the prevail-
ing tradition looks like inside the discipline, where the beholders of
images are simply ignored as sociohistorical components of the images
他们自己, this is hardly surprising.

At this point, I believe that the formulation of the problem of the

relationship of center-periphery can be useful and productive. What we
describe with the word reception, which sometimes sounds too passive,
and what from a macroscopic and supra-individual perspective looks
rather like a struggle for the appropriation of artistic products by various
interest groups (whilst the ruling classes have the decisive word in this
appropriation process), this phenomenon very often, though not always,
contains two aspects which, as far as I know, have remained unnoticed
by the literature about reception theory and which I would designate
with the words forced reception and suggested reception.

As everybody knows, the contempt for the province belongs to the traditional common-
places of metropolitan art critique of the 19th and 20th century. In a certain sense, my plea
here also aims at a reassessment of the relationship province-metropolis in favor of the
province. The embodiment of metropolitan arrogance is probably Sir Kenneth Clark’s defi-
nition of the characteristics of provincial art: “These, 然后, seem to me to be the characteris-
tics of a positive and independent provincial art: it tells a story; it takes pleasure in the facts;
it is lyrical and it achieves a visionary intensity” (Provincialism [The English Association:
伦敦, 1962], 9). This implicit identification of “petty-bourgeois” and “provincial” is prob-
ably a fundamental condition for the middle-class or upper middle-class contempt of the
省级. As an example of a naive metropolitan approach to art in the English provinces,
see Trevor Fawcett, The Rise of English Provincial Art—Artists, Patrons and Institutions outside
伦敦, 1800–1830 (牛津: Clarendon Press, 1974).

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

122

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

This “forced reception” is also the one I mean when I refer to

the dependency of the periphery on the center. 另一方面,
“suggested reception” is probably the most prominent characteristic
in artistic life, even inside the art centers, during the last forty years.
这些都是, in a few words, and viewed with a kaleidoscope, 这
main aspects of a subject which, in my opinion, is too important to
continue being ignored by art history.5

•

In the year 1836 (the Greek War of Independence had ended only a
short while before), General Makriyannis intended to commission a
painter to illustrate the fight for liberation of the Greeks against Turkish
rule in a series of twenty-four paintings, of which four copies were to be
made and presented to King Otto of Greece as well as the three rulers
who were guaranteeing Greece’s independence, namely the Kings of
England and France and the Czar of Russia.

How should he proceed to accomplish his goal? Let me read out the
part from Makriyannis’s Memoirs which will lead us directly to several of
the questions mentioned earlier:

. . . so I arrived in Athens and found a European painter [Makriyan-
nis actually writes “a Frank”; during this time period, the word was
used equally for all foreigners from Northern, Eastern, and Western
欧洲] and I commissioned these scenes from the wars of inde-
pendence from him. I could not speak his language. He painted
two-three pictures. They were not good. I paid him and he left.
After I had sent this painter away, I sent the word and they brought
me an old fighter from Sparta; his name was Panagiotis Zographos.
He came to me and we discussed everything and agreed on the

The problem is exactly that these questions have been taken seriously in other areas in
the meantime (人类学, 政治学, art criticism, cultural policy, and historical
研究). It is only within art history that one has hardly dealt with them. 在此背景下, 我
would like to refer to the important contribution by Enrico Castelnuovo and Carlo Ginzburg
(“Centro e periferia,” in Storia dell’Arte Italiana, Parte Prima: Materiali e Problemi, 体积
普里莫: Questioni e Metodi, Einaudi, Torino, 1979, 285–352; slightly modified and heavily
shortened French translation in Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, 不. 40, 十一月
1981, 51–72), which unfortunately is limited only to Italy, as well as two personal publica-
系统蒸发散 (the catalog of the exhibition Four Painters of 20th Century Greece, Wildenstein
Gallery, 伦敦, November–December 1975, 10–11; and “En torno al arte nacional,” Section
V and VI, in Plural, 不. 103, 四月 1980), in which I touched upon the problem formulated
here under the aspect of a juxtaposition of “national art–imported imperialist culture.”

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

123

price for every painting. And he sent for his two sons, and I accom-
modated all three of them in my house while they were working on
the paintings. This started in 1836 and ended in the year 1839. 我
took the painter along with me, and we walked up the mountains,
and I said to him: “This happened at this point, that at the other
观点; this battle took place in the following way; the leader of the
Greeks was that one, that of the Turks the other one.”6

We do not know the name of the painter from Northern Europe whose
attempts earned the disapproval of General Makriyannis. 然而, it is char-
acteristic of the Greek situation, as early as the middle of the thirties of
the 19th century(!), that Makriyannis first called upon a non-Greek. 作为
I said, we do not know who he was. But I believe that we are not wrong

when we imagine the works of the master,
which Makriyannis disapproved of, as follows.
Here is a lithograph based on a study cre-

ated by Peter von Hess in 1839. 赫斯, 这
painter of two known paintings at the Neue
Pinakothek in Munich (Arrival of King Otto
in Nauplia on February 6, 1833 and Reception
of King Otto in Athens on January 13, 1835),
recorded the fight for the liberation of the
Greeks in a series of thirty-nine sketches
(today also at the Neue Pinakothek in
慕尼黑), based on which H. Kohler printed
his lithographs in 1852.7

We see here his depiction of the conquest

of Acrocorinth by Panurgias. This is approxi-
mately how we would have to imagine the
rejected representations by the “Frank”: 和

Peter von Hess. The Conquest of Acrocorinth by Panourgias,

1839. Lithograph by H. Kohler, 1852.

6
7

Yannis Vlachoyannis, Archive of General I. Makriyannis, Volume II, 雅典 1907, 349.
Befreiung Griechenlands in XXXIX Bildern, entworfen von Peter Hess auf Befehl seiner
Majestät Ludwig I. König von Bayern, 在 10 Heften a 4 Blatt, 1852–1854. 根据
Joseph Maillinger (Bilder-Chronik der königlichen Haupt- und Residenzstadt München vom XV.
bis in das XIX. Jahrhundert, 慕尼黑, Publishing House of the Montmorillon Art Dealers,
Volume II, 1876, 不. 1359, 86 and no. 128, 14–15), the lithographs of Kohler and Atzinger
are based on the “Original boards for the paintings executed in wax paints from modern
Greek history by Nilson in the arcades of the Courtgarden in the years 1841–1844, drawn
with chalk by P. Hess.” According to Stelios Lydakis (Die Geschichte der neugriechischen
Malerei, 雅典, Melissa, 1976, 461), the lithographs were produced based on the series of
oil sketches, also designed by Hess, and now located in the Neue Pinakothek in Munich.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

124

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

Panagiotis Zographos. First Battle of the Greeks against the Turks at the Bridge of Alamana,

1836–39. Watercolor on cardboard, 50 ∞ 63 厘米. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

such an understanding of pictorial space; with the excessive attention
that is paid to the main hero; with such an accumulation of figures full
of local color in the foreground; ETC. 明显地, Makriyannis did not
want to hear or see anything of that nature.8

Let us take a look at what he preferred in its place: a watercolor on

cardboard, 50 × 63 cm by Panagiotis (or more correctly: Dimitrios)
Zographos (there is a long discussion about the identity of Panagiotis
and the involvement of his sons in the completion of the four series; A
debate which is not of interest to us at this moment9), which is pre-
served in the Gennadios Library in Athens. The title of the work is First

The specialist literature is divided into two large camps in the interpretation of the reasons
for rejecting the “Frank” by Makriyannis. Many authors are of the opinion that “the work of
the western artist leaves Makriyannis unsatisfied, for reasons that have nothing to do with
aesthetic preference. . . . As far as Makriyannis was concerned, the paintings had to feature
all the elements which would have been present in the reporting of a battle and, at the same
时间, all the military events of the fight for liberation would have to be mentioned,” which
would practically rule out a collaboration with an academic artist from the thirties (Spyros
Asdrachas: “Makriyannis and Panayotis Zographos—The History of Illustration of the Fight
for Liberation,” in The Greek Painters, Volume I: From the 19th to the 20th Century, Melissa,
雅典, 1974, 17–18). I prefer the second interpretation (which does see an aesthetic-
culturally conditioned partisanship in the rejection of the paintings by the “Frank”), as it
has already been championed categorically by Angelos Prokopiou, 1821 in Folk Painting,
雅典, no year [1940], 16–17 and 211–229.
I believe that the research by Angeliki Fenerli (“The Painters of Makriyannis: Dimitrios and
Panayotis Zographos,” in O Politis, 不. 36, 七月 1980, 52–63) in the Greek National Archives
has solved the problem in a convincing manner.

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

125

Battle of the Greeks against the Turks at the Bridge of Alamana and Death of
the Commander-in-Chief Diakos, the Archbishop of Salona Isaias and Other
Gallant Officers.

On the right, we see the city of Lamia with its castle, the Turkish army,

infantry, and cavalry, 不. 6 the hero Diakos, 不. 7 the archbishop, ETC.
A different scale of values prevails here: viewed from an art-
historical and from a West and Central European perspective, we would
say that the painter “was not familiar with the achievements of the
Italian Renaissance”; that we are facing a mixture of Byzantine tradition
and folk art. And yes, it could remind us of Persian and Turkish minia-
ture painting. Drawing on cultural history, 然而, we would say that
the recipients of such works would consider the greatness of the indi-
vidual more in his deeds and less in the traits of his physiognomy.

To be stressed above all: 希腊, the Orient, are not understood
here as either picturesque or sentimental, characteristics which we find
constantly in West European art carried by philhellenism with Greek
subjects from the years 1820 到 1880.

Back to our problem: General Makriyannis judged the works by
Zographos better than the representations “by the Frank.” It is, 也许,
the last time (with the exception of the highly intellectualistic move-
ment of the Fotis Kontoglou group in the 1930s, in which the battle cry
“Back to Byzantine painting—Down with European art!” was heard)
that a modern Greek spontaneously preferred and supported a kind of
painting that takes a different course than the West European pictorial
传统. Resistance toward West European tradition and complete affir-
mation of one’s own tradition, these appear in my opinion to be the con-
clusions to be drawn from the incident of the year 1836.

然而, the periphery of Europe was soon inundated by the

中央, 西方, and East European painting tradition.

In the case of Greece, one can read the phases of the country’s polit –

ical dependency directly from the periods of the history of its painting.
A Bavarian was the first king and Bavarian was the first school of

modern Greek painting after the establishment of an independent state
in the year 1830—the “Munich School,” as it is called. For peripheral
雅典, the center of “Western” painting was located on the Isar for
half a century. Theodoros Vryzakis (1819–1878), trained in the Munich
学院, painted this scene in 1847, entitled The Consolation or Solace,
which can be regarded as the emblem of Greek dependency on the
European image of Greece.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

126

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

Nothing is missing: national costumes, sentimentalism, the refer-
ence to antiquity; a cool, “romantic” landscape. The only thing which
Vryzakis was probably missing was the knowledge that this painting
technique did not have its center in Munich, but in Paris. The Greek
took from his center, namely Munich, what Munich had taken from its
中心, namely Paris—the model which Gustave Schnetz and Leopold
Robert had worked out in Rome during the 1820s.

The entire problem, to which I would like to direct your attention

今天, lies here: in the instinctive resistance of 1836 and in the confor-
mity of 1847, in these two works which were created in a time span of
eleven years, but which are actually separated by centuries. Let us rather
说: they represent two worlds.

•

At the age of twenty-eight, in the year 1914, the Mexican painter Diego
Rivera painted a picture in Paris which provides testimony for his
friendship with Picasso and Juan Gris.10

An artist of the periphery paints the Sailor at Lunch (Marinero
almorzando), in the center, within the prevailing understanding of the

Primarily residing in Paris since 1908, Rivera started his cubist paintings at a time when
“actual” Cubism was approaching its close and had started to transform itself into the
“established avant-garde,” namely in the year 1913. Some of his works of 1912 (the year of
“rapid expansion and internationalization of Cubism” according to Douglas Cooper) 是
referred to as “pre-Cubist” by the critics (例如, Berta Taracena). For Rivera’s cubism in gen-
埃拉尔, see Rita Eder, “El periodo cubista de Diego Rivera,” in the catalog of the exhibition
Diego Rivera: Exposicion Nacional de Homenaje, Palacio de Bellas Artes, Mexico City, 1977–
1978, 79–88.

Theodoros Vryzakis. 这

Consolation (Solace), 1847. 油

on canvas, 44 ∞ 57 厘米. 国家的

Gallery, 雅典. Image courtesy

of Wikimedia Commons.

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

127

Diego Rivera. Sailor at Lunch (Marinero almorzando), 1914.

Oil on canvas, 114 ∞ 170 厘米. Museo Casa Diego Rivera,

de México Diego Rivera Frida Kahlo Museums Trust, 墨西哥,

D.F. / Artists Rights Society (ARS), 纽约. Photograph by

Museo Casa Estudio Diego Rivera y Frida Kahlo, Guanajuato.

center.11 Undoubtedly, this is a model
instance of what I am calling adaptation,
conformation, or accommodation.

Approximately ten years later, 后

a successful bourgeois revolution in
墨西哥, Rivera, who has become a
supporter of socialism by now, starts
his fresco cycle in the Ministry of
Education.12

The Embrace was one of the earliest

frescos of this cycle, created around
1923. One could hardly imagine a more
complete rejection of the art of the
European center than here.13 This does
not mean that the thorough studies of
Italian fresco painting of the 14th and
15th century and the knowledge of contemporary art of the European
metropoles do not shimmer through.14 It merely means that we are deal-
ing with an understanding of volume, even of the image as such (not to

11 More likely: “in an art perception that in the meantime had come to prevail in the center.”

明显地, the entire question “What is an art center?” or “How is an art center structured?”
or “Which are the mechanisms that reproduce an art center and maintain it?” is raised at
这一点. An art center can maintain itself only when it is constantly admitting elements
of the periphery but transforms them at the same time. The art center itself has a hierarchi-
cally designed structure. The question of which elements play an important role on a per-
manent basis and which depend on the economic situation, how they differ from country
to country and according to historic periods (the artistic milieu and its recruitment, 私人的
galleries, art criticism, state cultural policy, acquisition policy and organization of exhibi-
tions at the national museums, patronage, ETC。) can neither be posed nor be answered in
the context of the present paper (see footnote 2).
A member of the communist party of Mexico since 1922, Rivera was granted the huge
commission in the same year by Jose Vasconcelos, Minister of Education and Culture at
时间, a commission that he started working on in 1923 and completely finished only in
1928. In collaboration with other artists (primarily Xavier Guerrero, Jean Charlot, Carlos
Merida), 1,585 square meters of walls on three floors of the building were painted in frescos.
The transition appears to be formed by the fresco The Creation, painted in 1922 在里面
Bolivar auditorium of the National Preparatory School.
Jean Charlot attempted to answer the question “What were the reasons that brought about
this sudden change of heart and radical change of style?” by arguing that it was precisely

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

128

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

mention the preference for
monumental painting15),
which intentionally turned
its back on the “avant-garde”
art that was prevalent in the
center at the time.

This inclination toward
monumentalism and surface
quality can be found, 由
方式, both in the mural paint-
ing of the Aztecs as well as
the Mayas, and the turn of
the Mexican muralists toward
pre-Columbian art is attested
to from the beginning by
their manifestoes. Rivera’s
own obsession with collect-
ing pre-Columbian art is
well-known.

Diego Rivera. Tropical Mexico and the God Xochipilli and His Votaries, 1926. Fresco, north

wall, Patio del Trabajo, Secretariat of Public Education Main Headquarters, Mexico City.

Artists Rights Society (ARS), 纽约. Photograph by Rafael Doníz.

Let us briefly look at Tropical Mexico and the God Xochipilli and His

Votaries, Rivera’s fresco in the staircase of the Ministry of Education,
created around 1926. Despite all the adoption of elements from the
art of the center (now and then influences from Gauguin, as is the
case here; in other works adoptions from George Grosz, Otto Dix, 甚至
from Hodler),16 we can say that the model character of the art center

Rivera’s trip to Italy in November of 1920 (哪个, by the way, was financed by Vasconcelos)
to study Italian fresco painting (“Diego Rivera in Italy,” in An Artist on Art—Collected Essays
of Jean Charlot (University Press of Hawaii: 檀香山, 1972), Volume II, 213–230). 这
argument was actually provided first by Rivera himself (“After I had roamed through the
peninsula all the way to Sicily, I returned to Paris with 325 图纸. That was the material
on which I wanted to base my Mexican attempts”; see the catalog of the exhibition Kunst der
Mexikanischen Revolution (NGfBK: West-Berlin, 1974), 139). To a large extent, it certainly
explains a work such as The Creation (see footnote 13), and perhaps a thing or two about the
earliest frescoes in the Ministry of Education, but hardly Rivera’s new style as a whole or the
phenomenon of Mexican fresco painting as such.
“We reject the so-called easel painting and the entire art of ultra-intellectual circles and
praise the style of monumental art, because it is public possession and useful to the public”
is declared in the manifesto of the Syndicate of Technical Workers, Painters, and Sculptors,
signed by Rivera (1923).

16 Can we imagine that Gauguin, who fled from the center to Polynesia, or that the colony of
artists from the remote farming village of Worpswede, viewed from a Mexican perspective
(and be it from the perspective of the Mexican art center), also represent the art of the cen-
特尔? We have to manage with such a paradox, 除其他事项外.

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

129

is breaking up or that its models are being productively remodeled, 在
this phase of Mexican history in which the country’s economic, 政治的,
and cultural dependency is being contested by large mass movements
(which unite the liberal bourgeoisie, the working class, and the im –
mense peasantry).

Part of the periphery turns its back on the center and creates its
own world. It becomes independent and its own center.17 But can we
explain this art historical phenomenon of formal changes without refer-
ring to political and social events?

The crushing of the pro-French dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz and
the parallel decline of the attractiveness of the French art center18—in
what other way would it be possible for these undoubtable facts to enter
into the discourse of the discipline of art history than by means of a
political geography of art?

•

At the end of the sixties, beginning of the seventies, “hard edge” paint-
ing reached Mexico. Works by Ellsworth Kelly such as Two Panels: Red
Yellow (created in 1971, acrylic on canvas, 227 × 203 厘米, Westphalian
State Museum, Münster); by Frank Stella such as Sanbornville I (从
the “Irregular Polygon Series,” created in 1966, alkyd and epoxy color
on canvas, 272 × 380 厘米, National Gallery West Berlin); or C (painted
1964, acrylic on canvas, 177.2 × 177.2 厘米, Art Gallery of Ontario) 经过
Kenneth Noland became fashionable.

As early as the mid-seventies, Geometrismo Mexicano was officially
celebrated in Mexico.19 It is a “typical Mexican achievement” of which
I would also like to show three examples: a work by Eduardo Vazquez
Baeza, Quiebre Cuatro (created in 1973, acrylic on canvas, 150 × 100 厘米);
Composition by Roberto Real de León from the year 1973 (typographical

See also Julia Elena Soto Martinez, La escuela Mexicana de pintura y su influencia en
Latinoamerica, 博士, Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico City, 1977, typescript.
As is well known, this ranges from the self-confident reference to “our remarkable autoch-
thonous civilization” (manifesto of the Syndicate of Technical Workers, Painters, 和
Sculptors of 1923) up to the vehement denunciations of West-European art and particularly
the Paris School. The examples, in which Rivera ridicules “the pitiful imitations of art of the
European metropoles,” and “pseudo artists who are still suffering from endemia which
turns them into lackeys of the Europeans,” are numerous (see Diego Rivera, Arte y Politica,
Raquel Tibol ed. (Editorial Grijalbo: Mexico City, 1979)).

19 首先, I am thinking about the exhibition El Geometrismo Mexicano; Una Tendencia

Actual, which opened its doors in November 1976 in the Museum of Modern Art in Mexico
城市. Representative in the same way is the publication of the Instituto de Investigaciones
Esteticas of UNAM, El Geometrismo Mexicano, with texts by Ida Rodriguez Prampolini,

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

130

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

Frank Stella. Sanbornville I, 1966.

Alkyd and epoxy paint on canvas,

371 ∞ 264 ∞ 10 厘米. Staatliche

Museen zu Berlin, Nationalgalerie.

Rights Society (ARS), 纽约.

Photograph by Jörg P. Anders

/ Art Resource, 纽约.

Roberto Real de León.

Composition, 1973. Typographical

ink on cardboard, 240 ∞ 220 厘米.

Image courtesy of the artist.

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

ink on cardboard); finally Composition by Francisco Moyao (painted in
1976, acrylic and lacquer on wood).

再次, representative examples of a total adaptation to the

model of the powerful center whose reception is being mediated by a
skillful, well-balanced cultural policy.

•

Juan Acha, Xavier Moyssen, Jorge Alberto Manrique, and Teresa del Conde (Mexico City,
1977). The latter also contains an extensive bibliography. In this connection, I would like
to point out that the exhibition and its catalog as well as the publication from 1977 consoli-
dated phenomena under the heading of “geometrism” that are way too different, 甚至
incompatible. 例如, what does the fantastic fountain of Fernando Gonzalez
Gortazar in Guadalajara have to do with “geometrism”?

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

131

My last example concerns the relationship of center and periphery in
苏联. I would like to put debates about realism, critical real-
主义, and Socialist Realism aside at this point and raise the question of
the relationship between Russian and Soviet-Russian art on the one
手, and the art of the Soviet Republics of Asia on the other hand.

Russian painting of the end of the 19th and the early 20th century,

as represented by painters such as Isaac Levitan (in his work since
1890) and Valentin Serov, is primarily committed to French Impression-
ism and Neo-Impressionism despite the continuance of its own tradi-
系统蒸发散. In a second phase, the achievements of Cézanne, the French
Fauves, and also of the German early expressionists are adopted
(Larionov, Bakst, Jawlensky, Kandinsky undertake such adoptions until
1910, indeed up to World War I). The art collections of Russian enthusi-
asts, such as Shchukin and Morozov, contributed their share to this
development in Russian art. The key figure for the Russians is, 没有
怀疑, Henri Matisse. This change of direction toward French art was
also continued by Victor Borissov-Mussatov who passed away at an early
年龄, by Konstantin Korovin (died in 1939) and by Igor Grabar (died in
1960). Korovin’s Coffeehouse in Jalta, 从 1905 (oil on canvas, 44.5 ×
71.5 厘米, Tretyakov Gallery, 莫斯科), is a good example of the applica-
tion of a French-“Mediterranean” point of view in the Russian south.
After the Revolution, especially since the thirties, a mixture of these
elements with the academic tradition of Ilya Repin (which Serov had
fought against successfully) has been increasingly operative. 今天, 这
mixture is viewed as one (although not the only one) “healthy” alterna-
tive to West European and local decadence (Kandinsky, El Lissitzky, ETC。)
and is sometimes qualified as “Russian realism.” The works of Arkady
Plastov from the fifties and sixties, which are often referred to as “the
heights of socialist realism,”20 are perhaps more accurately seen as
embodying a second alternative. 尽管如此, it was this mixture that
was exported after the October Revolution, specifically from the Russian
SSR to the other socialist Soviet Republics of Asia.

第一的, I show you two works by an artist of the Kyrgyz SSR, Semyon

Chuikov, who had been trained in Russia.21 You see Daughter of Soviet
Kyrgyzstan, painted in 1948, now located in the State Tretyakov Gallery

例如, S. Kusnezowa, in Arkady Plastow (Aurora Art Publishers: Leningrad, 1974), 41.

20
21 His personal case illustrates in excellent fashion the national problem as well as the ques-
tion at hand of passing on Russian traditions into non-Russian republics. “Soviet-Kyrgyz
painter, born in Frunse in 1902, living in Moscow” according to Hans Vollmer’s Allgemeines

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

132

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

in Moscow, and his Kyrgyz Landscape, 从 1946 (oil on cardboard,
52 × 82 厘米, also in the Tretyakov Gallery). Chuikov, a full member of
the Academy of Arts of the USSR, and Lenin Prize winner, studied in
Moscow during the twenties and
was a student of Robert Falk,
whose work is closely connected to
French painting. In this manner, A
“Kyrgyz” painter in Russia during
the twenties learned to see his
国家, and a European vision of
the Soviet South and Orient has
been constructed on this basis.

A look at a landscape of the

Armenian painter Mger Abegjan,
who was also trained in Moscow,
such as his Valley of the Ara
Mountains (oil on canvas,
80 × 95 厘米, collection of the
artist) 的 1961; a landscape by the
Mongolian painter Badamjavin
Chogsom, In the Gobi Desert
从 1967 (oil on canvas,
200 × 140 厘米); and two works
by Chingiz Akhmarov, Artist of
the People of the Uzbek SSR: 他的
Portrait of Rakhima from the year
1960 (oil on canvas, 100 × 80 厘米) and his Girl with Fruits from the
年 1962 (tempera on canvas), show this intrusion of the West into
the Soviet East.

Tretyakov Gallery.

Semyon Chuikov. Daughter of Soviet Kyrgyzstan, 1948. Oil on canvas,

120 ∞ 95 厘米. State Tretyakov Gallery, 莫斯科. Photograph by the State

Lexikon der bildenden Künstler des XX. Jahrhunderts, Volume VI (莱比锡: VEB Seemann,
1962), 453. 通过对比, Chuikov belongs to the “Russian school” and was born in
Moscow in 1902, according to Bénézit’s Dictionnaire critique et documentaire des peintres,
sculpteurs, dessinateurs et graveurs, 3rd edition (巴黎: Gründ, 1976), Volume X. The latter
thesis is also repeated by the catalog L’Art Russe des Scythes à nos jours—Trésors des Musées
Soviétiques (巴黎: Grand Palais, October 1967–January 1968) and by François Eryz
in Peintres contemporains (巴黎: Mazenod, 1964), 452. The bio-bibliography Semyon
Afanasyevich Chuikov, published by the Ministry of Culture of the Kyrgyz SSR (Frunse,
1965), does not mention Chuikov’s place of birth in the biographical section, but this sec-
tion tells us that his father was a Russian and a writer in the army. 另一方面, 我们
can read in the short introduction: “The Russian painter is the first one in Kyrgyzstan who
was honored with the high decoration of national painter of this republic” (p. 3). Kyrgyzstan
is also mentioned as the republic “where he was born” (同上。).

133

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

I have the impression that a European vision of the Orient and the

exotic South that was prevalent in the Russian SSR is also being dis-
seminated in the Asian Republics of the Soviet Union by the center (经过
means of art academies, 出版物, commissions, medals) 然后
the “maintenance of the national cultural heritage” is otherwise reduced
to a more or less sterile understanding of folk art and the national tradi-
的. We can see this, 例如, in the fresco paintings for the Yulduz
Teahouse in Samarkand by the aforementioned Chingiz Akhmarov,
dated to 1970.

Which political interests are being represented by such a cultural
政策 (if my observations reflect the main tendency)? This is an impor-
tant question that ought to be posed and answered.

•

At this point, let us not attempt to reduce these disparate elements to a
common denominator, since they are too different, but let us use them
to shed some light on the series of questions outlined at the beginning.
With respect to my central thesis: these phenomena can be cap-
tured by a traditional auxiliary discipline of art history, namely art geog-
拉菲, under the condition however that it undergoes a substantial
reform.

Art geography has fallen into disrepute. And rightfully so. 因为
for far too long, it has been the tool of nationalistic and racial monoma-
nias. In Germany, based on Friedrich Ratzel’s (partially concocted)
anthropogeography, it concentrated primarily on the question of art
landscapes and tribal peculiarities within a national territory (often with
the idea of justifying its given borders or their expansion).22 The fight
for the borders of Alsace and Lorraine,23 the fight for the nationality of
the “Gothic,” the question regarding Germany’s eastern frontiers, 这
search for the German character in art,24 these were the questions which
art geography had pursued for three decades. And in the name of these
兴趣, all cultural, 社会的, and political aspects of art geography were
被忽略.

第二次世界大战后, it is true that the importance of social and polit-

22 Of the type “Westphalia as art landscape” or “The art of German tribes and art landscapes.”
23 Walther Zimmermann, “Zur Abgrenzung der Kunsträume im Elsass und in Lothringen,”

in Elsass-Lothringisches Jahrbuch, Volume XVIII (1938), 123–142.
For the last three points, see the pamphlet by Pierre Francastel, L’Histoire de l’art instrument
de la propagande germanique (巴黎: Librairie de Médicis, 1945).

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

134

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

ical factors for art geography were recognized. 例如, Reiner
Hausherr wrote in 1970: “Even in cases where a connection to social
and political factors does not immediately become recognizable for art
历史, it is frequently present.”25 However, these findings were seldom
applied. Harald Keller’s publications on the art landscapes of Italy
and France26 are actually still representative of the status of German-
speaking art geography after World War II.27

This is even more surprising at a time in which geographers them-
selves are opening new avenues, whether it is the school of “social geog-
raphy” around Wolfgang Hartke in the Federal Republic of Germany28
or the group around Yves Lacoste and the magazine Hérodote in Paris,
which endeavors to overcome traditional geography (which primarily
attended to population distribution and the morphology of the earth)29
and which at the same time pursues an economic, 社会的, 和政治
geography.30

Thanks to the Spanish conquest of the largest part of Latin
美国, baroque (a “metropolitan style” par excellence according to
Sir Kenneth Clark31) became the dominant architectural style of the

“Kunstgeographie—Aufgaben, Grenzen, Möglichkeiten,” in Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter,
体积 34 (1970), 170.

26 Harald Keller, Die Kunstlandschaften Italiens (慕尼黑: Prestel, 1960), and Die

Kunstlandschaften Frankreichs, Proceedings of the Scientific Society at Johann Wolfgang
Goethe University, Frankfurt/Main, 体积 1, 年 1962, 不. 4, Franz Steiner Verlag,
Wiesbaden, 1963. See also Keller’s theoretical foundation of his understanding of art geo-
graphy in “Kunstgeschichte und Milieutheorie,” in Eine Gabe für Carl Georg Heise zum 28.
六、. 1950 (柏林: Gebrüder Mann, 1950), 31–54.
在这种情况下, the exceptions prove the rule again. See the excellent discussion of the term
“art landscape” by Herbert Beck and Horst Bredekamp in the catalog of the exhibition Kunst
um 1400 am Mittelrhein: Ein Teil der Wirklichkeit (Frankfurt/M.: Liebighaus, Museum alter
Plastik, 1975), 30–40.
看, 例如, Zum Standort der Sozialgeographie—Wolfgang Hartke zum 60. Geburtstag,
Münchner Studien zur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeographie, 体积 4 (Kallmünz/Regensburg:
Verlag Michael Lassleben, 1968) (with important contributions by M. Derruau and H. J.
Keuning).

29 Naturally, the forebears of such regeneration attempts reach far into the 19th century:

I am thinking particularly of Elisee Reclus.
“One of the main characteristics of university geography since its existence in France, 为了
almost a century, is the elimination of political phenomena from its field of vision. Contrary
to all the evidence, the corporation believes that they do not have anything to do with geog-
拉菲, and that their consideration would result in the negation of a scientific approach. 这
term geopolitics is viewed as tarnished because one is still insisting on not recognizing any-
thing else in it but arguments that justify the expansionism of the Nazis [. . .]. Eliminating
the political is the central epistemological problem of university geography” (Yves Lacoste,
“Editorial,” in Hérodote, 不. 22 (1981), 4–5).
克拉克, Provincialism, 3–4.

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

135

17th and 18th century south of the Rio Bravo. With the sword in one
hand and the Bible in the other, they plundered, 折磨, evangelized,
建成, and painted. At every location where there was once a temple of
the Mayas or Aztecs, they erected a baroque church.

This “forced reception” of the baroque in Latin America forms a

long chapter that cannot be overlooked by any art historian.

I believe that the partially “forced,” partially “suggested reception”
of the New York School after 1945 is a chapter that is just as important.
因为, 到底, the meeting of the Red Army with units of the US
Army in the year 1945 at the Elbe river opened a decisively new chapter
in the history of art. A certain variant of Socialist Realism became preva-
lent in Bucharest, and a certain variant of “abstract expressionism” or
photorealism in Teheran or Munich.

•

In the book Amerikanische Kunst von 1945 bis heute (whereby American is
understood as the possession of the United States of America, 和
Canadians and Argentinians may, by all means, protest against such a
seizure of the entire continent), which serves as the catalog for the exhi-
bition New York in Europa in the West-Berlin National Gallery (1976), 我们
can read some valuable statistical data concerning the dissemination of
art of the United States in Europe after 1945.

It features a list of European museums that purchased works from
artists from the United States between 1945 和 1976. The usefulness
of such statistics cannot be stressed enough. 然而, the phenomenon
of “suggested reception” would have been captured more completely if
one had also recorded statistically magazine articles and books, exhibi-
tions by artists from the United States in public museums and private
galleries and European artists of action painting, color field, and concep-
tual art during the same period. A world map of the dissemination of
art from a center, let’s say, by decades, would not only be informative.
It would be an indispensable tool for any art history that takes itself
严重地.

Why do we not have a cartographical recording of the dissemina-
tion of “action painting” during the fifties, from New York to Buenos
Aires, from London via Madrid to Cape Town, 是的, even to Hong Kong
and Sydney?

It is obvious why we cannot reach a consensus on the explanation
and evaluation of art historical phenomena. Because art historians are

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

136

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

just as divided into schools and tendencies as literary historians, archi-
tects, or any other professional group. Could we at least agree that such
a cartographical determination of facts can be helpful to everyone? 然后
we could argue better about the explanation of the facts.

•

I hope that the complexity of these problems has become clear, 尽管
the heterogeneity of my examples, or better, because of them. 现在, 让
me briefly defend the legitimacy of my plea.

第一的, a word about resistance and accommodation. The term resis-

tance has been used earlier to draw attention to the nonobservance of a
模型. 在 1958, 例如, Jean Bony published a longer study, enti-
tled “The Resistance to Chartres in Early 13th Century Architecture,”32
in which he attempted to explain the resistance against a new architec-
tural conception, a new model, in this case embodied by the Cathedral
of Chartres.

But aside from its earlier usage, how else besides the use of the

term resistance and its complementary term accommodation should
one describe the phenomenon of conscious rejection or acceptance of an
imported art ideal? Can the phenomenon of colonial baroque be viewed
differently than as the embodiment of accommodation by the con-
quered Indian peoples of Latin America to the art of the conquerors
and its simultaneous transformation? Because accommodation—allow
me to emphasize it—is far from being passive imitation. Naturally, 那
also exists. 但, 当然, it does not cover the variety of types or forms
of accommodation.

•

Another comment of a general nature. During the last one hundred
年, especially after 1945, one element, which we can discern latently at
least since the 16th century, has become extremely important: 的作用
the culture industry and its connection with governmental cultural policy.

When Adorno and Horkheimer used the term culture industry forty
几年前,33 some considered it excessive. 今天, everybody speaks about

Journal of the British Archaeological Association, Third Series, Volume XX–XXI (1958), 35–52.
Castelnuovo and Ginzburg emphatically pointed to Bony’s essay in their aforementioned
学习 (“La resistenza al modello” and “Modello e nuovo paradigma,” 325–328) whereby they
exaggerated their flirting with the terminology of T. S. Kuhn (whose theory of the structure
of scientific revolutions they are directly referencing).
[Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno,] Dialektik der Aufklärung (阿姆斯特丹: Querido
Verlag, 1947).

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

137

the culture industry. Terms such as culture war, fight for cultural hege-
金钱, cultural imperialism have become self-evident. Even the French
Minister of Culture has recently denounced cultural imperialism
during a UNESCO conference!34 We have at our disposal the studies
by Max Kozloff 35 and Eva Cockcroft,36 who have shown that the dissemi-
nation of the New York School all over the world was a main objective
of the cultural policy of the United States during the fifties and sixties,
and that exhibitions and publications abroad were systematically
financed by foundations under government control in order to reach
this objective.

In his contribution “Die Aufgaben der Kunstgeographie,” which

he presented at the 13th International Congress of Art History in
Stockholm in 1933, Paul Frankl wrote: “It is obvious that a map of the
dissemination of Islam or Christianity also says something about art
地理. 同样的方式, art is dependent on the political borders
and those of the administration (dioceses). But this connection with the
remaining cultural factors may be taken up only after maps of the art
团体, that is style groups, have been established.”37

I believe that this is still the prevailing position today. Politics is
limited to state borders, Christianity or Islam are “cultural factors” that
have nothing to do with politics, and everything must wait anyhow until
we have established maps of the influence of art groups!

•

This leads me to another point: the taboo on politics in art history.

我们, art historians, have the habit of ignoring the implications of
politics and the political power in our area on the one hand, 甚至
deny its existence; 另一方面, and unfortunately much too often,
we have the habit of serving the respective ruling powers with our art
历史.

I would like to transpose the old motto “Everybody talks about the
weather, we don’t” into “Everybody talks about politics—except us, 这

Jack Lang in Mexico City on July 27. Le Monde published excerpts from his speech on
八月 7, 1982.

35 Max Kozloff, “American Painting during the Cold War,” Artforum (可能 1973): 43–54.
36

Eva Cockcroft, “Abstract Expressionism, Weapon of the Cold War,” Artforum (六月 1974):
39–41.
XIII Congrès International d’Histoire de l’Art, Résumés des Communications présentées
au Congrès, 斯德哥尔摩, 1933, 87.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

138

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

art historians.”38 In the middle of a massive economic crisis, facing a
possible World War III; in a time of decrees against radicals, when we
are constantly looking for a scapegoat, it has to be said loud and clear:
moral responsibility, including that of art historians, is considerable. 到
assume it today also means to take the political dimension of our field
into account. 例如, we cannot hear talks about the North-South
dialogue on a daily basis and not undertake anything in our own disci-
pline in this sense. 在这样做, we allow the alleged dialogue to turn
into a farce. In this sense also, an “art geography of dependency”
amounts to an urgent task.

The price, which we would have to pay for it, is naturally high:
we have to stop viewing power balances as quality balances. Eighty years
after the release of Riegl’s Spätrömische Kunstindustrie, we can no longer
speak of “advanced civilizations” and “primitive cultures” or of the
“monuments of higher culture” (as Dagobert Frey was still representing
systematically in his work “Geschichte und Probleme der Kultur- und
Kunstgeographie,”39 published in 1955); we also have to give up the idea
of progress in art, let alone based on linear development.

Am I allowed to say in a city, which claims to safeguard the heritage

of Aby Warburg, that it would certainly mean to be true to his spirit if
one were to finally abandon the haughty overvaluation of European art?
To ensure that the commitment to Warburg does not turn into lip ser-
副,40 would it then not be necessary to also ban Eurocentrism from the
curriculum of the university? 41 We say “art history” and today, 在 1982,

例如, do we have an equivalent in art history to D. Perrot and R. Preiswerk,
Ethnocentrisme et histoire: L’Afrique, l’Amérique indienne et l’Asie dans les manuels occidentaux
(巴黎: Anthropos, 1975)?

39 Archaeologia Geographica, 年 4 (十二月 1955), 90–105.
40

I am far removed from wanting to create a Warburg cult. There is too much that separates
me from him, from a theoretical and methodological point of view. 仍然, 问题
remains whether one should not actually draw the full consequences from his famous plea
的 1912 “in favor of a methodical boundary expansion of our science of art from a substan-
tial and spatial viewpoint” (“Italienische Kunst und internationale Astrologie im Palazzo
Schifanoja zu Ferrara,” in Gesammelte Schriften, 乙. G. Teubner, Volume II (Leipzig and
柏林, 1932), 478), instead of constantly quoting the sentence on the one hand and pub-
lishing the photographs of Warburg among the Pueblo Indians on the other hand. 为了
例子, is it possible, more than half a century after Warburg’s death, that only a few
books about photography have found their way into the libraries of the art history depart-
评论 (and then not even as the result of an expansion of the concept of art, but as a result
of the trade which now, after the trade with “original graphics” would like to do business
with photography) and that film literature seems still to be denied entry?
例如, if we look at the Hamburg curriculum of the last five years, 那是, 自从
这 1978/79 winter semester, with the exception of two seminars whose subject was

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

t
r
A

我
A
r
e
H
p

我

r
e
p

d
n
A

s
r
e
t
n
e
C

t
r
A

你
哦
A
我
哦
C

我

我
j
d
A
H

139

we still mean European art from the Carolingians to today + art of the
United States of the 20th century.42 That is not simply absurd. It is the
testimony of an irresponsible politics. No doubt, it would be in the best
traditions within our discipline, and it is also a moral and scientific obli-
gation, that we confront the facts which have shaped the art of the 20th
century in a significant way. Whether we designate the study of these
facts with the general term political art geography or simply art geography
is unimportant. It is important that we take the existence of this fact
into account and search for and find suitable means for this type
of study.

Tr anslaTed by dieTer WälTermann

我

D
哦
w
n
哦
A
d
e
d

F
r
哦
米
H

t
t

:
/
/

d
我
r
e
C
t
.

米

我
t
.

e
d
你
A
r
t

米
A
r
t
我
C
e
–
p
d

我

F
/

9
2
1
1
9
1
8
4
6
5
7
4
A
r
t

米
_
A
_
0
0
2
6
7
p
d

乙
y
G
你
e
s
t

哦
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
米
乙
e
r
2
0
2
3

non-European art (“Brazilian Architecture after 1945” and “The Reception of Mexican
Fresco Painting in Germany”), it is apparent that all other courses and lectures were dedi-
cated to the art of Europe, or more correctly: to the art of the NATO countries (with one
exception: “Architecture and City Planning in Leningrad and Moscow”), whereby 99% 的
the attention was addressed to the art of the “cultivated” nations of the Occident (德国,
意大利, 法国). Even if the titles of the courses and lectures by themselves are certainly not
sufficient to be able to draw undeniable conclusions, they are still representative of an exist-
ing tendency.

42 One piece of evidence for this claim: the library of the art history department of the

University of Hamburg, which contains several thousand volumes, has hardly more than
four hundred publications about the whole field of non-European art, of which at least half
has the art of the United States as its subject.

s
n

我

G
r
A
米
t
r
A

140 D O C U M E N T image

下载pdf