《哥特建築與經院哲學──關於中世紀藝術、哲學、宗教之間對應關係的探討》 (Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism)
Title
Gothic architecture and scholasticism
Author
Erwin Panofsky
Contributor
Erwin Panofsky
Publisher
New American Library, 1976
作者歐文．潘諾夫斯基[美]
譯者吳家琦
出版社東南大學出版社 2013
《哥特建築與經院哲學--關於中世紀藝術哲學宗教之間對應關係的探討》在著名的威爾瑪系列講座中具有突出的地位。威爾瑪討論是為了紀念美國境內本篤教派創 始人威爾瑪而專門設立的系列講座，以邀請著名學者到聖文森特學院舉辦專題講座而聞名。《哥特建築與經院哲學--關於中世紀藝術哲學宗教之間對應關係的探 討》中，作者一反當時歷史學家劃分歷史時期讓眾學科彼此之間缺乏交集的做法，研究哥特時期建築藝術與經院哲學之間同步關係。他將歷史學家沒有受到外界干擾 的情況下所獲得對關於歷史分期的結論，與藝術史家所獨立獲得的關於藝術分期的結論放到一起研究，發現兩者是完全同步調的，完全一致的。
本書首次將中世紀哲學研究的歷史學家在沒有受到外部干擾的情況下所獲得的關於歷史分期的結論，與藝術史家所獨立獲得的關於藝術分期的結論放到一起看，將哥特建築與經院哲學並列研究，發現了二者之間的同步關係。
【美國】歐文·潘諾夫斯基(1892—1968)，美國德裔猶太學者，著名藝術史家。生前先後在柏林、幕尼黑、弗賴堡、漢堡等幾所大學任職，自1935年 開始在美國普林斯頓大學高等研究院的人文研究所從事研究，並在美國多所大學里舉辦講座或授課。他是神像學以及中世紀、文藝復興、巴洛克時期藝術方面的權 威，也是荷蘭與佛拉芒地區古籍插圖方面的專家。 Panofsky, Erwin (pănŏf'skē), 1892-1968, American art historian, b. Germany, Ph.D. Univ. of Freiburg, 1914. After teaching (1921-33) at the Univ. of Hamburg and serving as professor of fine arts at New York Univ., he joined (1935) the faculty at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N.J. His writings are among the most important of the 20th cent. in art history. Panofsky contributed studies, particularly in the realm of iconography, of the medieval, Renaissance, mannerist, and baroque periods. He is admired for his immense erudition, his discoveries, and his profound observations, laced with touches of humor. Among his principal works in English are Studies in Iconology (1939, 2d ed. 1962), Albrecht Dürer (1943, 4th ed. 1955), Early Netherlandish Painting (1953), and Renaissance and Renascenses in Western Art (2d ed. 1965). Other writings include The Codex Huygens and Leonardo da Vinci's Art Theory (1940), Abbot Suger on the Abbey Church of St.-Denis and Its Art Treasures (1946), Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism (1951), Galileo as a Critic of the Arts (1954), Meaning in the Visual Arts (1955), Correggio's Camera di San Paolo (1961), Tomb Sculpture (1964), Idea: A Concept in Art Theory (1924, tr. 1968), and Problems in Titian, Mostly Iconographic (1969).
黑體字為我翻過的書
Works
Idea: A Concept in Art Theory (1924)
Perspective as Symbolic Form (1927)
Studies in Iconology (1939)
The Life and Art of Albrecht Dürer (1943)
Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism (1951)
Early Netherlandish Painting (1953)*
Meaning in the Visual Arts (1955)
Pandora's Box: the Changing Aspects of a Mythical Symbol (1956) (with Dora Panofsky)
Renaissance and Renascences in Western Art (1960)*
Tomb Sculpture (1964)
Saturn and Melancholy: Studies in the History of Natural Philosophy, Religion, and Art (1964) (with Raymond Klibansky and Fritz Saxl)
Problems in Titian, mostly iconographic (1969)
Three Essays on Style (1995) (Ed. Irving Lavin)
*1952年瑞典講座....
Et in Arcadia Ego
收入 Meaning in the Visual Arts 《視覺藝術的含義》by Erwin Panofsky,
Studies in Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance by Erwin Panofsky, 1939/62/67/72, Harper & Row
《圖像學研究：:文藝復興時期藝術的人文主題》戚印平和范景中譯 ，上海：三聯，2011
《圖像學研究--文藝復興時期藝術的人文主題》(主編馮俊)是《上海三聯人文經典書庫》之一，書中包括了皮耶羅兩組繪畫中的人類早期歷史、盲目的丘比特、時間老人、佛羅倫薩與意大利北部的新柏拉圖主義運動、新柏拉圖主義運動與米開朗琪羅等內容。
本書適合從事相關研究工作的人員參考閱讀。
這本翻譯追求的真，可能約達九成五，這是根據對照《序言》(PREFACE 可能是1939?的版本)的翻譯而說的。
翻譯上的一些小問題
SYNTHESISE (漏譯)和UNITED(翻譯為縱合)不分。
注解上的一些小問題，譬如說 THE MARY FLENXNER LECTURESHIP 省略部分。
第二次演講是由普林斯頓大學的”美術與考古學系負責的 (under the auspieces)等。
現在互連網可查出‘nostrasque domos, ut et ante, frequentat.’出自Ovid 的《變形記》第323行。
中譯本序
1962年版序言
序言
Ⅰ．導論
Ⅱ．皮耶羅兩組繪畫中的人類早期歷史
Ⅲ．時間老人
Ⅳ．盲目的丘比特
Ⅴ．佛羅倫薩與意大利北部的新柏拉圖主義運動
Ⅵ．新柏拉圖主義運動與米開朗琪羅
附錄博納羅蒂府的泥塑模型
圖版
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF REFERENCES CYTED
索引
序
自百余年前中國學術開始現代轉型以來，我國人文社會科學研究歷經幾代學者的不懈努力已取得了可觀成就。學術翻譯在其中功不可沒，嚴復的開創之功自不必多 說，民國時期譯介的西方學術著作更大大促進了漢語學術的發展，有助于我國學人開眼看世界，知外域除堅船利器外尚有學問典章可資引進。上世紀80年代以來， 中國學術界又開始了一輪至今勢頭不衰的引介國外學術著作之浪潮，這對中國知識界學術思想的積累和發展，乃至對中國社會進步所起到的推動作用，可謂有目共 睹。新一輪西學東漸的同時，中國學者在某些領域也進行了開創性研究，出版了不少重要的論著，發表了不少有價值的論文。借此如株苗之嫁接，已生成糅合東西學 術精義的果實。我們有充分的理由企盼著，既有著自身深厚的民族傳統為根基、呈現出鮮明的本土問題意識，又吸納了國際學術界多方面成果的學術研究，將會曰益 滋長繁榮起來。
值得注意的是，20世紀80年代以降，西方學術界自身的轉型也越來越改變了其傳統的學術形態和研究方法，學術史、科學史、考古吏、宗教史、性別史、哲學 史、藝術史、人類學、語言學、社會學、民俗學等學科的研究日益繁榮，研究的方法、手段、內容日新月異，這些領域的變化在很大程度上改變著整個人文社會科學 的面貌，也極大地影響了近年來中國學術界的學術取向。不同學科的學者出于深化各自專業研究的需要，對其他學科知識的渴求也越來越迫切，以求能開闊視野，進 發出學術靈感、思想火花。近年來，我們與國外學術界的交往日漸增強，合格的學術翻譯隊伍也日益擴大，同時我們也深信，學術垃圾的泛濫只是當今學術生產面相 之一隅，高質量、原創性的學術著作也在當今的學術中堅和默坐書齋的讀書種子中不斷產生。然囿于種種原因，人文社會科學各學科的發展並不平衡，學術出版方面 也有畸輕畸重的情形(比如國內還鮮有把國人在海外獲得博士學位的優秀論文系統地引介到學術界）。
有鑒于此，我們計劃組織出版“上海三聯人文書庫”，將從譯介西學成果、推出原創精品、整理已有典籍三方面展開。譯介西學成果擬從西方控經典（自文藝復興以 來，但以二戰前後的西學著作為主）、西方古代經典（文藝復興前的西方原典）兩方面著手；原創精品取“漢語思想系列”為範疇，不斷向學術界推出漢語世界精品 力作；整理已有典籍則以民國時期的翻譯著作為主。現階段我們擬從歷史、考古、宗教、哲學、藝術等領域著手，在上述三個方面對學術寶庫進行挖掘，從而為人文 社會科學的發展做出一些貢獻，以求為21世紀中國的學術大廈添一磚一瓦。
MIT Press, 1997 - Art - 247 pages
Three Essays on Style
Erwin Panofsky
MIT Press, 1997 - Art - 247 pages
with a memoir by William S. Heckscher
Erwin Panofsky (1892-1968) was one of the preeminent art historians of the twentieth century. A new translation of his seminal work, Perspective as Symbolic Form, was recently published by Zone Books; now three remarkable essays, one previously unpublished, place Panofsky's genius in a different perspective: What Is Baroque?, Style and Medium in the Motion Pictures,and The Ideological Antecedents of the Rolls-Royce Radiator. The essays are framed by an introduction by Irving Lavin, Panofsky's successor as Professor of Art History at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, discussing the context of the essays' composition and their significance within Panofsky's oeuvre, and an insightful memoir by Panofsky's former student, close friend, and fellow emigre, William Heckscher.
All three essays reveal unexpected aspects of Panofsky's sensibility, both personal and intellectual. Originally written as lectures for general audiences, they are composed in a lively, informal manner, and are full of charm and wit. The studies concern broadly defined problems of style in art—the visual symptoms endemic to works of a certain period (Baroque), medium (film), or national identity (England)—as opposed to the focus on iconography and subject matter usually associated with Panofsky's "method." The essay on Baroque, which Lavin considers "vintage Panofsky" and which appears here for the first time, and the one on film were written in 1934. The Rolls-Royce piece was written in 1962.
Three Essays on Style
Erwin Panofsky
MIT Press, 1997 - Art - 247 pages
0 Reviews
with a memoir by William S. Heckscher
Erwin Panofsky (1892-1968) was one of the preeminent art historians of the twentieth century. A new translation of his seminal work, Perspective as Symbolic Form, was recently published by Zone Books; now three remarkable essays, one previously unpublished, place Panofsky's genius in a different perspective: What Is Baroque?, Style and Medium in the Motion Pictures,and The Ideological Antecedents of the Rolls-Royce Radiator. The essays are framed by an introduction by Irving Lavin, Panofsky's successor as Professor of Art History at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, discussing the context of the essays' composition and their significance within Panofsky's oeuvre, and an insightful memoir by Panofsky's former student, close friend, and fellow emigre, William Heckscher.
All three essays reveal unexpected aspects of Panofsky's sensibility, both personal and intellectual. Originally written as lectures for general audiences, they are composed in a lively, informal manner, and are full of charm and wit. The studies concern broadly defined problems of style in art—the visual symptoms endemic to works of a certain period (Baroque), medium (film), or national identity (England)—as opposed to the focus on iconography and subject matter usually associated with Panofsky's "method." The essay on Baroque, which Lavin considers "vintage Panofsky" and which appears here for the first time, and the one on film were written in 1934. The Rolls-Royce piece was written in 1962.
with a memoir by William S. Heckscher
Erwin Panofsky (1892-1968) was one of the preeminent art historians of the twentieth century. A new translation of his seminal work, Perspective as Symbolic Form, was recently published by Zone Books; now three remarkable essays, one previously unpublished, place Panofsky's genius in a different perspective: What Is Baroque?, Style and Medium in the Motion Pictures,and The Ideological Antecedents of the Rolls-Royce Radiator. The essays are framed by an introduction by Irving Lavin, Panofsky's successor as Professor of Art History at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, discussing the context of the essays' composition and their significance within Panofsky's oeuvre, and an insightful memoir by Panofsky's former student, close friend, and fellow emigre, William Heckscher.
All three essays reveal unexpected aspects of Panofsky's sensibility, both personal and intellectual. Originally written as lectures for general audiences, they are composed in a lively, informal manner, and are full of charm and wit. The studies concern broadly defined problems of style in art—the visual symptoms endemic to works of a certain period (Baroque), medium (film), or national identity (England)—as opposed to the focus on iconography and subject matter usually associated with Panofsky's "method." The essay on Baroque, which Lavin considers "vintage Panofsky" and which appears here for the first time, and the one on film were written in 1934. The Rolls-Royce piece was written in 1962.
Title
Three Essays on Style
Author
Erwin Panofsky
Editor
Irving Lavin
Contributor
William S. Heckscher
Edition
illustrated, reprint
Publisher
MIT Press, 1997
****
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1996/feb/15/icon/
Icon
Three Essays on Style
by Erwin Panofsky, edited by Irving Lavin, with a memoir by William S. Heckscher
MIT Press, 245 pp., $25.00
Perspective as Symbolic Form
by Erwin Panofsky, translated by Christopher S. Wood
Zone Books/MIT Press, 196 pp., $24.95
“Expulsion into Paradise” was Erwin Panofsky’s characteristic remark in the spring of 1933, when he received the letter that deprived him of his chair in art history at Hamburg University because of his “race.” He had been so fortunate as to enjoy the foretaste of Paradise before, having divided his teaching activities between Germany and the United States for some time, and soon afterward his bliss became perfect on his appointment as Professor of Art History at the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study, made famous by the presence of an even more eminent “non-Aryan,” Albert Einstein.
It was one of Panofsky’s most attractive traits that he never behaved as if his unique position was his due. The arrogance traditionally associated with German professors was wholly alien to him. “Some people are vain and others conceited,” he once remarked to me. “I may be vain, but I am not conceited.” I was often privileged to experience the truth of that characterization—indeed, I had the impression that he felt doubly obliged to help younger colleagues because of his own good fortune.
In the public mind Panofsky’s name became associated with the subject with which he had introduced himself to the United States, his Studies in Iconology. His ingenious interpretations of Renaissance masterpieces in the light of Neo-Platonic philosophy caught the imagination of a whole generation who tried to emulate him, not always to his pleasure. But for Panofsky iconology was only one aspect of the method he had absorbed from the German tradition of art history, one which was deeply rooted in German intellectual history, but relatively new to American academic life. What distinguished this tradition was the claim to hold the key to the history of artistic styles as an expression or manifestation of changing “world views,” or Weltanschauungen. To this approach, which ultimately goes back to the Romantic philosophy of Georg Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831), the course of human history resembles a clockwork of wheels within wheels activated by the unfolding spirit of mankind, a spirit that animates art, no less than science, law, or religion, in a precise and determined way. On this interpretation it is the ultimate task of the art historian to demonstrate the dependence of artistic styles on the logic of this development, as it is the task of the astronomer to explain the position of the planets by his knowledge of Newtonian physics.
Thus the art historian embarking on such a demonstration had to be familiar with most of the other historical disciplines to adduce parallels from philosophy, poetry, and all the other aspects of the past. It was here that Panofsky excelled. He enjoyed the game of finding links between individual works of art and stylistic developments in other fields, and despite his notorious quip that we must “beware of the boa constructor,” he was firmly convinced that such links must always be there to be found—indeed, I have described elsewhere with what emphasis he asserted his creed in …
This article is available to online subscribers only.
Please choose from one of the options below to access this article:
Please choose from one of the options below to access this article:
沒有留言:
張貼留言