The History of Reception of the Michelangelesque idea of Art History in the Modern Age of Japan

在夏目漱石（1867-1916）的小说中，我们可以看到但丁式和米开朗琪罗式的地狱。1901年，东京帝国大学教授、宗石的朋友大土香泰二（Yasuji Otuka）发表了关于裸体画的幽默批评，讲述了1568年瓦萨里讲述的故事中，比亚格洛虚伪地指责米开朗琪罗在西斯廷教堂的“最后审判”中的裸体画。1906年，草石的小说《我是一只猫》（1905-1906）对黑田圣树的《智慧、印象、哨兵》（1899）和《女人的裸体》（1901）的这些泰恩式和斯巴达式的思想进行了猛烈的批评。黑田的赞助人、东京帝国大学校长富山一也在1890年讲述了这一英雄思想，他将西沟高森比作姆兰吉洛或他的“大卫”。画家Yuichi Takahshi不仅承认自己是西乡的狂热崇拜者，而且还画了神话中的英雄。“大和武亲王，以米开朗基罗式的悲剧姿态作为日本民族的象征和西乡的隐喻。1888年在上野花园的山上，由东京艺术学校教授Koun Tak.amua根据木制模型制作的“西乡铜像”，让我们想起了1874年在佛罗伦萨南山米开朗基罗广场上的米开朗基罗“大卫”的青铜复制品，仿佛它是新生的皇家意大利的象征。这表明东京美术学校的第一任校长冈仓在1887年访问过意大利，因而接受了米开朗琪罗的艺术理论。因此，在1889年，他可以将Hogai Kano的“母性观音”与米开朗琪罗的“创造亚当”进行比较。总而言之，我们可以发现冈夸、雄一、宗关三人在理解米开朗琪罗的艺术理论方面所做出的努力。

In the novels of Soseki Natume(1867-1916), who could read the books by W.Pater and A.Symonds, we can find the dantesque and michelangelesque Inferno. In 1901, Yasuji Otuka, Professor of Tokyo Imperial Univesity and Soseki's friend, lectured on the humorous criticisms concerning the nude paintings, telling about Biaglo who hypocritically had blamed the nudes in Michelangelo's "Last Judgment"in Sistine Chapel as reported in the story told by Vasari in 1568. In 1906, Soseki' s novel, I Am A Cat(1905-1906), criticised bitterly Seiki Kuroda's "wisdom, Impression, Sentlment"(1899) and woman Nude" (1901) for these Tainesque and Spartan ideas. Syoichi Toyama, Kuroda's patron and president of Tokyo Imperial University, also told about the heroic idea in 1890, comparing Takamori Saigou to Mlchlangelo or his "David". Painter Yuichi Takahshi not only confessed to be ardent admirer of Saigo, but also painted the mythical hero. "Prince Yamato Takeru, in the michelangelesque tragic gesture as the symbol of Nationality of Japan and as the metapher of Saigo. The "Bronze Statue of Saigo" made after the wooden model by Koun Tak.amua, Professor of the Tokyo Art School, and located on the hill of Ueno Garden in 1888, reminds us the bronze replica of Michelangelo's "David", which had been located in 1874 in the Piazza di Michelangelo on the south hill of Florence as if it were a symbol of new-born Royal Italy. This demonstrates that Okakura, the first president of the Tokyo Art School, accepted the art theory of Michelangelo, because he had visited Italy in 1887. In 1889, therefore, he could compare Hogai Kano's "Maternal Avaloke- itesvara"to Michelangelo's "Creation of Adam". In conclusion, we can find the great intelligences in Okakua, Yuichi and Soseki to to have striven to understand the art theory of Michelangelo.