True to Life
True to Life
复制标题
逼真
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Arcilla
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Arcilla
假设你正在设计一门关于现代主义伟大作品的课程，这门课程将被交叉列为20世纪西方白人男性帝国主义101的意识形态文本。当你努力将作品与主题相匹配时，仔细考虑皮特·蒙德里安用红、黑、蓝、黄组成的润喉片，或弗朗茨·卡夫卡的《城堡》，你会变得更加困扰于它们坚定的非代表性品质。它们拒绝充当形而上学或历史概念的例证：你越是试图弄清楚如何利用它们来讨论，比如“人类对意义的追求”，或者“性欲奇观的新兴实践”，它们就越难反驳。你开始怀疑现代主义艺术作品是否真的能被教授。然后，这个问题在你的脑海中翻转：我们可以从他们明显反对教学的做法中学到什么？
Suppose that you are designing a course on the great works of modernism, to be cross-listed as Ideological Texts in Twentieth-Century Western White Male Imperialism 101. As you struggle to match works with topics, mulling over the likes of Piet Mondrian’s Lozenge Composition with Red, Black, Blue, and Yellow or Franz Kafka’s The Castle, you become more troubled by their determinedly non-representational quality. They resist serving as illustrations of either metaphysical or historical concepts: the more you try to figure out how to ride them to a discussion of, say, “the human quest for meaning,” or “emerging practices of libidinal spectacle,” the harder they buck. You start to doubt whether modernist artworks can be truly taught at all. And then the question flips in your mind: what could there be for us to learn from their manifest opposition to teaching?