海德格尔为什么给“艺术”打叉?——《克利笔记》与艺术的二律背反  

Why Did Heidegger Mark a Cross on“Art”:“Notes on Klee”and the Antinomy of Art

作　　者：吴苗淼 Wu Miaomiao

机构地区：[1]浙江工业大学人文学院,310023

出　　处：《文艺理论研究》2024年第3期141-150,共10页Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art

基　　金：浙江工业大学人文社科研究基金重点项目“海德格尔的艺术自然观研究”[项目编号:SKYZX20200064]阶段性成果。

摘　　要：尽管海德格尔把艺术认定为拯救技术时代危机的希望,但在其作于20世纪50年代的手稿《克利笔记》中,他却实行了一种创造性的书写行为,即在“艺术”一词上面打叉。通过对《克利笔记》及相关文本的分析可以发现,这个“艺术之叉”有两个相反相成的含义,否定性的含义表示艺术对形而上学的表象和体验方式的抵抗,肯定性的含义则暗示了艺术向着作为“■”的自身回转。这也集中体现了海德格尔艺术哲学中的二律背反,即两个各自成立又相互矛盾的命题:“艺术本身有着形而上学的本质”与“艺术本身有着转变的契机”。这种二律背反思想根植于海德格尔后期思想的最深处,也标志着海德格尔艺术哲学的现实关切,对于当代艺术的发展具有启发与警示的价值与意义。While Heidegger identified art as the beacon of hope amidst the technological era's crises,his action of inscribing a cross over the word“art”in his 1950s manuscript,“Notes on Klee,”symbolizes a profound and creative engagement with art's essence and its paradoxes.Through analyzing“Notes on Klee”and other related texts,it can be found that this“cross on art”has two opposite but complementary meanings.Negatively,it signifies art's resistance to metaphysical representation and experiential modalities.Positively,it suggests art's potential for self-referential transformation towards its essence as“■”(techne).Thus it embodies the antinomy in Heidegger's philosophy of art,namely,two respectively established but contradictory propositions,“art itself having the essence of metaphysics”and“art itself having the opportunity for transformation.”This antinomy,deeply embedded in Heidegger's later thought,highlights the philosophical stakes of Heidegger's engagement with art.It serves as a critical reflection on and a cautionary note about contemporary art's evolution,offering insights into the enduring complexities art faces in transcending its metaphysical constraints while seeking authentic transformation.

关 键 词：海德格尔 保罗·克利 《克利笔记》 艺术 打叉 

分 类 号：I0[文学—文学理论]