中西“空白”之比较  

A Comparative Study of the ″Blankness″ in Chinese and Western Aesthetics

作　　者：李克和[1] 张唯嘉[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东佛山大学文学与艺术学院中文系

出　　处：《外国文学研究》2005年第1期100-106,共7页Foreign Literature Studies

摘　　要：中西美学家都高度肯定“空白”的美学价值和意义 ,但他们所理解的“空白”并不尽相同 :中国古代的“空白”是一个模糊而无限的概念 ,而西方当代文论的“空白”清晰且有限。中国文论家认为“空白”的审美效应是由“道”的性质决定的 ,而西方学者则认为“空白”通过破坏可联结性来实现一种潜在的联结 ,并由此而获得审美意味。中西都认为创作主体心灵的虚空是创造艺术空白美的前提 ,但中国古代的虚空是出尘以屏除自我 ,而西方则是去蔽以找回纯粹的自我。Both Chinese and Western aestheticians highly appreciate the aesthetic merits and significance of ″blankness″. However, their understandings of ″blankness″ are not completely identical: the Chinese ancient term ″blankness″ was of a blurry and boundless concept, while the contemporary Western literary term ″blankness″ appears legible and limited. Chinese essayists reckon that the aesthetic effect of ″blankness″ is determined by the nature of ″Dao″, while the Western scholars think that, through the breaking of the possible binding nature, ″blankness″ could reveal a potential connection, thus achieving an aesthetic implication. However, both hold the view that the virtual vacancy of the writer′s soul is the prerequisite for creating the artistic beauty of ″blankness″. Yet the Chinese ancient concept of virtual vacancy mainly meant to cast aside the mote to dispose of oneself, while the Western concept means to wipe out the shabby to take back the pure self.

关 键 词：虚空 创造艺术 当代文论 中国文论 审美意味 创作主体 自我 中西 有限 心灵 

分 类 号：I01[文学—文学理论]