Time and the Modern: Current Trends in The History of Modern Temporalities*
Time and the Modern: Current Trends in The History of Modern Temporalities*
复制标题
时间与现代：现代时间性历史的当前趋势*
DOI：
10.1093/pastj/gtz012
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
A. Fryxell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Fryxell
1958年，美国艺术史学家、中美洲文化学者乔治库布勒（George Kubler）明确指出了时间对历史实践的重要性。他认为，历史学家的目的是“描绘时间”或捕捉“时间的多种形态”。[1]古布勒没有按照时间顺序来排列艺术品，也没有按照连续的时期或风格来排列，而是提出了一种非时间顺序的方法，强调一件特定艺术品（例如，一座大教堂）的年代不如它在选定序列中的相对位置（例如，一座大教堂哥特式拱门的发展）重要。虽然库布勒的作品仍然立足于线性的序列概念，长期以来一直因其减少到“主要对象”和艺术技巧的渐进发展而受到批评，但他对年表和历史分期的抗议揭示了现代时间的一个重要方面：对二十世纪渐进线性时间的单一账户的持续抵制。库布勒的工作已经被最近几本涉及视觉研究时间的专著所取代。[2]例如，基思·莫克西（Keith Moxey）在《视觉时间》（Visual Time）中对北方文艺复兴时期绘画的研究中提出了这样一个问题：当代艺术在我们理解历史文物时扮演着什么样的角色？3.我们如何解释艺术品的“多元时间性”？后一个问题由亚历山大内格尔和克里斯托弗·伍德在《逆时文艺复兴》中提出，关注的是历史现在中起作用的多重时间。虽然我们在“现在”的时刻看待艺术，但每件艺术品都有许多不同的姿态，
In 1958 George Kubler, the American art historian and scholar of Mesoamerican culture, articulated the importance of time to historical practice.‘The aim of the historian’, he suggested, is to ‘portray time’or to capture ‘the manifold shapes of time’. 1 Instead of arranging artworks according to chronological time and thus according to successive periods or styles, Kubler proposed a nonchronological approach that would emphasize how the date of a specific art object (for example, a cathedral) was less important than its relative position in a chosen sequence (for example, the development of a cathedral’s Gothic arches). Although Kubler’s work remained grounded in linear notions of sequence that have long been criticized for its reduction to ‘prime objects’ and progressive development of artistic techniques, his protest against chronology and the utility of historical periodization reveals a crucial aspect of modern time: the continued resistance to singular accounts of progressive, linear time in the twentieth century. Kubler’s work has been superseded by several recent monographs that engage with time in visual studies. 2 In his study of Northern Renaissance painting in Visual Time, for example, Keith Moxey asks what role the contemporary plays in our understanding of historical artefacts. 3 How do we account for the ‘plural temporalities’ of artworks? The latter question, raised by Alexander Nagel and Christopher Wood in Anachronic Renaissance, focuses attention upon the multiple times at work in the historical present. Although we view art within the ‘now’moment, every artefact gestures to many different kinds of