托马斯·克洛与文化研究视域中的前卫艺术理论  

Thomas Crow and Avant-garde Theory from a Cultural Studies Perspective

作　　者：蒋苇 Jiang Wei

机构地区：[1]华东理工大学艺术设计与传媒学院,200237

出　　处：《文艺理论研究》2024年第3期131-140,共10页Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“文化研究视域中的艺术批评--基于托马斯·克洛的研究”[项目编号:21YJC760033];上海市设计学Ⅳ类高峰学科资助项目;华东理工大学高校基本科研业务费专项基金[项目编号:JKZ01212203]的阶段性成果

摘　　要：对文化工业的批判是从法兰克福学派到《十月》学派艺术理论的核心立场之一。尽管对精英主义的反驳和修正早已为大众文化正名,理论界却没有形成与大众文化“和解”的前卫艺术理解范式。托马斯·克洛吸收了文化研究的思想,认为大众文化自身就包含潜在的批判性,前卫艺术通过对大众文化资源的择取调用,在形成新的艺术解决方案的同时,实现社会批判的隐射。克洛重新界定了“前卫艺术”的概念,使一种能容纳大众文化的前卫艺术历史叙事成为可能。相较于布赫洛与福斯特重返批判理论的“对抗”范式,他通过揭示艺术与大众文化之间动态协作的张力关系为新前卫艺术辩护。这一辩证的关系模式与多元主义与乌托邦主义都拉开了距离,将前卫艺术理论引向协作与竞争的现实之维。The hostility of aesthetic modernism to mass culture has been a central position in avant-garde theory from the Frankfurt School to the October Group.Although mass culture has already been rehabilitated through a re-evaluation and critique of modernism,no avant-garde theory has achieved reconciliation with mass culture.Inspired by cultural studies theories,Thomas Crow argues that potential criticality is already embodied in mass culture and that,by appropriating it,avant-garde art can offer new solutions to art while expressing an implicit social critique.Crow re-defines the concept of the“avant-garde”to allow for a historical narrative that makes room for mass culture.On one hand,while the October Group returns to the oppositional mode of critical aesthetics,Crow defends neo-avant-garde art by revealing the tension and dynamic cooperative relationship between high art and mass culture.On the other hand,this dialectical relationship has led the Utopian avant-garde theory to embrace the realistic dimension of cooperation and competence.

关 键 词：前卫艺术 大众文化 托马斯·克洛 文化研究 《十月》学派 

分 类 号：J0-05[艺术—艺术理论]