是什么让一件艺术品变得伟大？ |第169期 |现在的理念 --- What Makes A Work Of Art Great? | Issue 169 | Philosophy Now
- description: Each answer below receives a book. Apologies to all the entrants not included.
- source: url
- author: FOR AUTHORS
Your complimentary articles
You’ve read three of your four complimentary articles for this month.
您已经阅读了本月四篇免费文章中的 三篇 。
You can read four articles free per month. To have complete access to the thousands of philosophy articles on this site, please
您每月可以免费阅读四篇文章。要完全访问本网站上的数千篇哲学文章，请
Question of the Month本月问题¶
What Makes A Work Of Art Great?是什么让一件艺术品变得伟大？¶
Each answer below receives a book. Apologies to all the entrants not included.下面的每个答案都会收到一本书。向所有未包括在内的参赛者表示歉意。¶
Great art must score highly on four measures: emotional impact (visual and visceral); technique (masterful and harmonious); concept (relevant or timeless); and originality (of medium, subject, or treatment). There are many ways each of these criteria can be satisfied, both subjectively and objectively, but the media are open-ended. One can build great architecture; paint on canvas or a wall; sculpt wood, rock, or beach; project an image on a building or the Moon; make an installation; stage a happening… The media extend to literature, music, stage, and film. Even engineering is not entirely bound to functionality. A ship, aircraft, or bridge can satisfy all the ‘great art’ criteria, even if stirring emotion was no part of the designer’s intention.
伟大的艺术必须在四个指标上得分很高：情感影响（视觉和内在）;技术（熟练而和谐）;概念（相关或永恒）;和原创性（媒介、主题或处理）。主观和客观上都可以通过多种方式满足这些标准，但媒体是开放式的。一个人可以建造伟大的建筑;在画布或墙上作画;雕刻木头、岩石或海滩;在建筑物或月球上投射图像;进行安装;上演一个事件......媒体延伸到文学、音乐、舞台和电影。即使是工程也不完全与功能绑定。一艘船、飞机或桥梁可以满足所有“伟大的艺术”标准，即使激起情感不是设计师的意图的一部分。
To be art, a work has to be made deliberately by a person (assuming AI art is necessarily derivative), and witnessable in principle by anyone. To have meaning it needs a context wider than its content. An abstract canvas needs a perceptive apparatus. A painting or photograph whose natural subject has been carefully selected owes to the physical setting and human expectations. Does this mean there are boundaries to what anyone should consider art? The way art has developed historically, though decoration, statuary, performance, religious scenes, portraiture and landscapes, to conceptual art – supports this. But boundaries evolve, and then the question is, how far? An entertainment in sixteenth century Paris involved collecting cats in a bag, hoisting them up in a public square, and lighting a fire underneath. Was that art? Emotion stirred ought not be at the expense of anything living. Blowing up a shed can be art; blowing up a building with people in it is not generally considered art. Banksy is the master of street art. His concept is topical comment, his treatment of subjects original, his medium the entire urban environment. He aims to stir an emotion in the viewer. But what of a banana taped to a wall? The concept and technique are original, if deliciously simple. The emotional effect is more comple. Are we to conclude from it that, at base, art is imitating a life that is absurd, pretentious, meaningless, transient? Whatever values one ascribes to them, where great engineering or great philosophy leave a tool, great art leaves an impression.
要成为艺术，一件作品必须由一个人故意制作（假设人工智能艺术必然是衍生的），并且原则上任何人都可以见证。要有意义，它需要一个比其内容更广泛的背景。抽象画布需要一个感知装置。一幅精心挑选自然主题的绘画或照片，这要归功于物理环境和人类的期望。这是否意味着任何人都应该认为艺术是有界限的？艺术在历史上的发展方式，从装饰、雕像、表演、宗教场景、肖像和风景到观念艺术——都支持了这一点。但边界会演变，然后问题是，走多远？在 16 世纪的巴黎，一种娱乐活动是将猫收集在袋子里，将它们吊到公共广场上，然后在下面生火。那是 艺术 吗？激起的情绪不应该以牺牲任何生物为代价。炸毁棚屋可以是艺术;炸毁一栋有人的建筑物通常不被视为艺术。班克斯是街头艺术大师。他的概念是主题评论，他对主题的处理是原创的，他的媒介是整个城市环境。他的目标是激起观众的情感。但是粘在墙上的香蕉呢？概念和技术是原创的，如果非常简单。情感效果更加完整。我们是否可以从中得出结论，从根本上说，艺术是在模仿一种荒谬、自命不凡、毫无意义、短暂的生活？无论人们赋予他们什么价值，伟大的工程或伟大的哲学留下的工具，伟大的艺术都会给 人留下印象 。
Nicholas B Taylor, Hove
尼古拉斯·泰勒，霍夫
Works of art can be pleasing, beautiful, life-enhancing, shocking, offensive, and subversive, even dangerous. They may be ephemeral, fleeting, or more lasting, even more or less permanent. They may be carefully crafted or spontaneous, singular (present at only one experience), or endlessly reproducible and repeatable. They may also be variously valued as anything from ‘objectionable’ to ‘great’. The following features, not in any order of importance, may contribute to a work’s greatness:
艺术作品可以是令人愉悦的、美丽的、改善生活的、令人震惊的、冒犯性的、颠覆性的，甚至是危险的。它们可能是短暂的、转瞬即逝的，或者更持久，甚至或多或少是永久性的。它们可能是精心制作的，也可以是自发的，可能是单一的（只出现在一次体验中），或者是无限可复制和可重复的。它们也可能被不同地评价为从“令人反感”到“伟大”的任何东西。以下特征（不按重要性排序）可能有助于作品的伟大：
Impact: Capturing the attention of, and engaging, recipients.
影响：吸引收件人的注意力并吸引他们。
Emotional response: Moving the recipients in some fundamental way – potentially in many different ways: for example, prompting sensations of beauty, love, tragedy, horror, compassion, guilt, transcendence, sublimity, harmony…
情绪反应：以某种基本的方式感动接受者——可能以许多不同的方式：例如，激发美、爱、悲剧、恐怖、同情、内疚、超越、崇高、和谐的感觉......
Striking a chord: Resonating in some way(s) with the observer’s worldview or feelings.
引起共鸣：以某种方式与观察者的世界观或感受产生共鸣。
Depth: Allowing different levels of interpretation and appreciation, of knowledge and understanding, and embodying different (even potentially contradictory) meanings – thus, in a sense, reflecting the complexity of human experience.
深度：允许不同层次的解释和欣赏、知识和理解，并体现不同的（甚至可能矛盾的）含义——从而在某种意义上反映了人类经验的复杂性。
Formal structure: Whether or not formal aesthetic devices are used – such as, say, the Golden Mean, Aristotle’s Unities, or conventional symphonic form – the work should have some appreciable structure (even if only apprehended unconsciously by the observer). Formlessness, chaos, or overwhelming discordance, are unlikely to be conducive to greatness in art.
形式结构：无论是否使用形式美学手段——例如中庸之道、亚里士多德的统一体或传统的交响乐形式——作品都应该具有某种可观的结构（即使只是被观察者无意识地理解）。无形、混乱或压倒性的不和谐，不太可能有利于艺术的伟大。
Universality: Attracting, engaging, and being appreciated over time by people of very diverse backgrounds and cultures.
普遍性：随着时间的推移，吸引、吸引和欣赏来自不同背景和文化的人们。
Durability: Although being ephemeral or fleeting don’t preclude the possibility of greatness in a work of art, nonetheless, a work which continues to interest and provide pleasure or satisfaction over time, especially if to people in different contexts and times, may by virtue of that durability be considered great.
耐用性：虽然短暂或转瞬即逝并不排除艺术作品伟大的可能性，但尽管如此，一件作品随着时间的推移继续引起人们的兴趣并提供快乐或满足感，特别是对于不同环境和时代的人来说，可以凭借这种耐用性被认为是伟大的。
Ingredients which qualify for greatness may occur within an otherwise lesser work. Only a few such embedded nuggets may arguably leave a sense of greatness for the whole.
有资格成为伟大的成分可能会出现在原本较小的作品中。只有少数这样的嵌入金块可以说会给整体留下一种伟大的感觉。
Peter McNaughton, Formby, Merseyside
彼得·麦克诺顿，默西塞德郡福姆比
What constitutes ‘Great Art’? As an expressionist paint artist and gallery volunteer at a world-class art institution (the Detroit Institute of Arts.), I am often intrigued by, and occasionally obsessed with, this question.
什么是“伟大的艺术”？作为世界级艺术机构（底特律艺术学院）的表现主义绘画艺术家和画廊志愿者，我经常对这个问题感兴趣，偶尔也会痴迷于这个问题。
First we need to define art. All human behaviors meet some perceived need, at either the conscious or subconscious level. The need to create art represents the need to express the often-powerful states of the inner being. Much like the mind itself, art may be beautiful, ugly, evil, good, ordered, or absurd. Simply put, art – whether paint, clay, words, or music – is energy expelled from the human mind, to be shared with other humans and the world.
首先，我们需要定义艺术。所有人类行为都满足了某种感知需求，无论是在意识层面还是潜意识层面。创造艺术的需要代表了表达内在存在通常强大的状态的需要。就像心灵本身一样，艺术可能是美丽的、丑陋的、邪恶的、善良的、有序的或荒谬的。简而言之，艺术——无论是颜料、粘土、文字还是音乐——都是从人类心灵中排出的能量，与其他人和世界分享。
But what makes it great? Here there exists a social component, a mere construct. At the gallery where I volunteer, visitors always ask for works by the same ‘great artists’: Monet, Van Gogh, Degas. They seem to never realize that the dusty old work by John or Jane Doe sitting in their attic could be just as wondrous as a self-portrait by Van Gogh. My point is that the fame or cost (often immense) of a work has nothing to do with its greatness. Rather, greatness in a work of art is its correlation with the sublime, meaning it expresses elements of vastness. (It is no coincidence that the Wikipedia essay on the sublime carries a picture of the painting Wanderer above the Sea of Fog by Caspar David Friedrich. It is also no coincidence that your magazine carries expressive figurative art on its pages. Thank you). And yes, works by Van Gogh and Degas also portray elements of the sublime – which might be theistic, metaphysical, or mysterious.
但是什么让它 变得伟大 呢？这里存在着一种社会成分，一种纯粹的建构。在我做志愿者的画廊里，参观者总是要求提供同样“伟大艺术家”的作品：莫奈、梵高、德加。他们似乎从未意识到，坐在阁楼上的约翰或无名氏的尘土飞扬的旧作品可能与梵高的自画像一样奇妙。我的观点是，一部作品的名气或成本（通常是巨大的）与它的伟大无关。相反，艺术作品的伟大在于它与崇高的相关性，这意味着它表达了广阔的元素。（维基百科上关于崇高的文章中带有卡斯帕·大卫·弗里德里希 （Caspar David Friedrich） 的画作《 雾海之上的流浪者 》，这并非巧合。您的杂志在其页面上带有富有表现力的具象艺术也并非巧合。谢谢）。是的，梵高和德加的作品也描绘了崇高的元素——可能是有神论的、形而上学的或神秘的。
Just for the record, the question I’m most asked at the Detroit Institute of Arts is “Where’s the bathroom?”
郑重声明，我在底特律艺术学院被问到最多的问题是“浴室在哪里？
Tim Strutz, Harrison Township, Michigan
蒂姆·斯特鲁茨，密歇根州哈里森镇
Before identifying great art, I’ll start by dividing artists from artisans. An artisan is a skilled craftsman who can produce items of exceptional quality. A painting by an artisan will be a close replica of a person or a landscape; an artisan writer will accurately describe a situation, or perhaps a philosophical idea. But in both cases there will be no attempt to code any further information within the work. The piece may have artistic merit, but this was not the intention of the creator. In the case of art, an emotion or another aspect of humanity’s condition is encoded deliberately by the artist. A view is expressed on reality and on what it means to be human in this reality. In Van Gogh’s Starry Night paintings we are not seeing a replica of the night sky but an abstract expression that speaks directly to our sense of wonder when we look up on a clear balmy night. In music our spirit can be stirred by either the French horns of Sibelius’s Karelia Suite bringing to mind the vast open snowy wastes of Finland, or an Aboriginal didgeridoo creating images in our mind of Uluru under the soft then blazing red Australian sunrise. In terms of writing, the classic realist novels of the late nineteenth century such as Moby Dick or Middlemarch communicate so much more about the human spirit than their settings of whaling or an English market town might suggest. And the alliteration, metaphors, similes and onomatopoeia of poetry conjure visions, thoughts, and feelings in ways that even the poet cannot imagine.
在确定伟大的艺术之前，我将首先将艺术家与工匠区分开来。工匠是能够生产出品质卓越的物品的熟练工匠。工匠的画作将是一个人或风景的近似复制品;工匠作家会准确地描述一种情况，或者也许是一个哲学思想。但在这两种情况下，都不会尝试在作品中编码任何进一步的信息。这件作品可能具有艺术价值，但这不是创作者的本意。就艺术而言，一种情感或人类状况的其他方面是由艺术家有意编码的。表达了对现实的看法，以及在这个现实中作为人类意味着什么。在梵高的《 星夜 》画作中，我们看到的不是夜空的复制品，而是一种抽象的表达方式，当我们在晴朗温暖的夜晚抬头仰望时，它直接表达了我们的惊奇感。在音乐中，西贝柳斯《 卡累利阿组曲 》的圆号可以唤起我们的精神，让人想起芬兰广阔的白雪皑皑的荒原，或者原住民迪吉里杜管在我们脑海中创造出乌鲁鲁在澳大利亚柔和而炽热的红色日出下的意象。在写作方面，19 世纪末的经典现实主义小说，如《 白鲸记 》或 《米德尔马奇 》，所传达的关于人类精神的信息比它们的捕鲸或英国集镇的背景所暗示的要多得多。诗歌中的头韵、隐喻、明喻和拟声词以连诗人都无法想象的方式唤起幻象、思想和感受。
But what makes great art? Any art that does not create any new ideas (such as AI-generated art), can be immediately classed as bad or mediocre. Admittedly, much art is a reworking of previous ideas; but a good artist will always bring new ideas to the work. This may only contribute a small amount to it, but it creates a new perspective. Moreover, in all good art, the audience is stimulated to bring their own feelings and experiences to the work. So, what distinguishes great art is the combination of the artisan’s technical mastery with the imagination and creativity to create an ever expanding range of intriguing and absorbing ideas, and feelings and thoughts that arise with each new encounter with it.
但是什么造就 了伟大的 艺术呢？任何没有创造任何新想法的艺术（例如人工智能生成的艺术），都可以立即被归类为糟糕或平庸。诚然，许多艺术都是对以前想法的改造;但一个好的艺术家总会给作品带来新的想法。这可能只对它做出了很小的贡献，但它创造了一个新的视角。此外，在所有优秀的艺术中，观众都会受到刺激，将自己的感受和经验带入作品中。因此，伟大艺术的与众不同之处在于工匠的技术掌握与想象力和创造力的结合，创造出不断扩大的有趣和引人入胜的想法，以及每次与它的新接触时产生的感受和想法。
Philip Brown, Bury St. Edmunds
菲利普·布朗，伯里圣埃德蒙兹
‘Art’ can be defined as the collection of all possible artworks in any field. A work of art is created by an artist, so it’s also necessary to define what an ‘artist’ is. My definition uses the concept of community, and I distinguish two types: A community of non-expert art lovers who are spontaneously touched by a work of art, and a community of art experts who use technical criteria when judging a work of art. An artist then is a person (or AI) who posits themselves as an artist or is considered as such by at least one of these communities. What, then, makes any work of art great? I consider greatness to be a quantitative variable, and I’ll use our two communities to illustrate this. Members of the community of non-expert art lovers share their thoughts and feelings towards a work of art in the public domain through a multitude of media. The greatness of that work of art is determined here by the amount of shared favourable thoughts and feelings towards that work. The emphasis is on the immediate experience as shared with others, and implies no objective stance towards a work of art. Members of the community of art experts, meanwhile, judge the greatness of an artwork by applying their sets of technical criteria, and make their assessments available in specialist productions in the public domain, such as in art books or art magazines. But the quantification of greatness can also be determined here by the amount of shared favourable judgments. It will be a scientific discipline to work out either quantification. Moreover, as both communities interact in the public domain, they will be able to reinforce or critique each other’s perception of the greatness of a work of art.
“艺术”可以定义为任何领域所有可能的艺术品的集合。艺术作品是由艺术家创作的，因此也有必要定义什么是“艺术家”。我的定义使用了社区的概念，我区分了两种类型：一种是非 专业艺术爱好者的社区，他们 自发地被一件艺术作品所触动，另一种是艺术 专家的社区 ，他们在评判一件艺术作品时使用技术标准。因此，艺术家是指将自己定位为艺术家或被这些社区中的至少一个认为是艺术家的人（或人工智能）。那么，是什么让任何艺术作品 变得伟大 呢？我认为伟大是一个定量变量，我将用我们的两个社区来说明这一点。非专业艺术爱好者社区的成员通过多种媒体分享他们对公共领域艺术作品的想法和感受。这件艺术作品的伟大程度在这里取决于对该作品的共同好感和感受的数量。重点是与他人分享的直接体验，并不意味着对艺术作品的客观立场。与此同时，艺术专家社区的成员通过应用他们的一套技术标准来判断艺术品的伟大程度，并将他们的评估在公共领域的专业作品中提供，例如艺术书籍或艺术杂志。但伟大的量化也可以在这里通过共同的有利判断的数量来确定。计算出任何一种量化都将是一门科学学科。此外，当两个社区在公共领域互动时，他们将能够加强或批评彼此对艺术作品伟大的看法。
Teije Euverman, Rotterdam
Teije Euverman， 鹿特丹
The question presumes there are identifiable criteria for greatness. ‘Great’ rather than just ‘good’ also suggests we’re talking about art with symbolic heft and influence, not just aesthetic appeal. Art is so various, from cave paintings to Baroque masterpieces, from sculpture to video, that defining objective, coherent criteria for its greatness would be impossible. Greatness like this is not an abstract universal quality inherent in some artworks but not others. Rather, great art is made, and ultimately mythologised, through the actions of the Art Establishment, which is a sort of ecosystem of opinion-formers in national and private museums and galleries, and includes critics, collectors, curators, academics, and the commercial market. To see how little greatness has to do with the art itself, one only need consider the changing reputations of some artists. Van Gogh sold only one painting in his lifetime. His work was not fashionable, and it certainly wasn’t ‘great’ at first. Turner, Bacon, and Lowry were also dismissed before later being ‘discovered’ and canonised.
这个问题假设伟大有可识别的标准。“伟大”而不仅仅是“好”也表明我们谈论的艺术具有象征意义和影响力，而不仅仅是审美吸引力。艺术是如此多样化，从洞穴壁画到巴洛克杰作，从雕塑到视频，以至于为其伟大定义客观、连贯的标准是不可能的。像这样的伟大并不是某些艺术作品所固有的抽象的普遍品质，但其他艺术品则不然。相反，伟大的艺术是通过艺术机构的行动创造的，并最终被神话化，艺术机构是国家和私人博物馆和画廊中意见形成者的一种生态系统，包括评论家、收藏家、策展人、学者和商业市场。要了解伟大与艺术本身的关系有多小，只需要考虑一些艺术家不断变化的声誉。梵高一生只卖了一幅画。他的作品并不时尚，一开始当然也不“伟大”。特纳、培根和洛瑞也被解雇，后来被“发现”并被封为圣人。
The views of the Art Establishment are always selective, and in flux. Linda Nocklin the art historian nailed the politics of greatness in her paper ‘Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?’. One might also ask why is there so few ‘great’ artworks by artists of colour, working class artists, or those working outside the Western European tradition? When it comes to art, greatness is a façade suspended on institutional scaffolding.
艺术机构的观点总是有选择性的，而且是不断变化的。艺术史学家琳达·诺克林 （Linda Nocklin） 在她的论文《为什么没有伟大的女性艺术家》中明确了伟大的政治。有人可能会问，为什么有色人种艺术家、工人阶级艺术家或西欧传统之外的艺术家的“伟大”艺术作品如此之少？说到艺术，伟大是悬挂在制度脚手架上的门面。
This scaffolding is not only ideological, it’s also economic. High auction prices, blockbuster exhibitions, and steep insurance premiums, don’t just reflect an artwork’s importance, they build it. When a painting sells for £80 million, the market isn’t just measuring cultural worth, it’s creating it. Price creates mystique. Cultural symbolism adds another layer – when an artwork is shorthand for something bigger than itself. Being emblematic of Japan, the greatness of Hokusai’s Great Wave grows. But even here greatness is not intrinsic to the artwork, it’s retrofitted. It’s questionable whether we’d be as moved by the Mona Lisa if it were not so famous. So greatness in art is not an inherent quality. It is a contingent consensus. We do not simply experience greatness, we manufacture it.
这种脚手架不仅是意识形态上的，也是经济上的。高昂的拍卖价格、轰动一时的展览和高昂的保险费，不仅反映了一件艺术品的重要性，而且还反映了艺术品的建造。当一幅画以 8000 万英镑的价格售出时，市场不仅仅是在衡量文化价值，而是在创造它。价格创造神秘感。文化象征主义增加了另一层——当一件艺术品是比它本身更大的事物的简写时。作为日本的象征，葛饰北斋 大浪 的伟大程度与日俱增。但即使在这里，伟大也不是艺术品所固有的，而是经过改造的。如果 《蒙娜丽莎 》不那么出名，我们是否会被它所感动，这是值得怀疑的。因此，艺术中的伟大并不是一种与生俱来的品质。这是一个偶然的共识。我们不仅仅是 体验 伟大，而是 制造 伟大。
Mike Nicholson, London 迈克·尼科尔森，伦敦
There’s a deeply subjective answer to this question, and a somewhat objective (or more precisely, quantifiable) answer.
这个问题有一个非常主观的答案，也有一个有点客观（或者更准确地说，是可量化的）答案。
Subjectively, I’d say art needs to inspire the mind or, poetically speaking, the heart. A painting may be utterly perfect from the standpoint of its technique, but also ‘cold’, awakening no emotions within a viewer. Another painting may be technically inferior, but still elicit deep feelings. I might add that technique can really only be compared for analogous works: say, two 1970s abstract paintings, or two Renaissance altar pieces. Moreover, an altarpiece might generate deep religious feelings or leave the viewer indifferent, or an abstract work may be viewed simply as an ensemble of geometric lines, or inspire a sense of wonder. And one must also recall that the criteria for a ‘proper’ technique, as defined by art schools or critics, varies, apparently nearly on a daily basis. I’ll add a personal note. I own two recordings of Mozart’s Requiem, both performed by world-renowned orchestras (the Berliner and Wiener Philharmonikers), and both directed by world-renowned conductors (Herbert von Karajan and Riccardo Muti). Given the calibre of the performers, both are technically perfect – but one is somewhat aseptic, while the other definitely conveys the greatness of the mystery of death (I’ll let the reader guess which is which, so as not to attract the ire of either camp!). Returning to the issue of technique, classical music is widely viewed as being of a higher technical standard than pop or rock, and usually is much more complex. However, there’s some pretty interesting heavy metal or folk music (for instance) whose elaborateness might be on par with classical counterparts. Perhaps then complexity could be a complementary benchmark for greatness?
主观上，我想说艺术需要激发思想，或者从诗意的角度来说，需要激发心灵。从技术的角度来看，一幅画可能完全完美，但也可能“冷酷”，不会唤醒观众内心的情感。另一幅画在技术上可能较差，但仍然能引起深刻的感情。我可以补充一点，这种技术实际上只能与类似的作品进行比较：比如，两幅 1970 年代的抽象画，或两幅文艺复兴时期的祭坛作品。此外，祭坛画可能会产生深刻的宗教情感或让观众无动于衷，或者抽象作品可能简单地被视为几何线条的整体，或激发一种惊奇感。人们还必须记住，艺术学校或评论家所定义的“正确”技术的标准显然每天都在变化。我将添加一个个人注释。我拥有两张莫扎特安 魂曲 的录音，均由世界著名管弦乐团（柏林爱乐乐团和维也纳爱乐乐团）演奏，均由世界著名指挥家（赫伯特·冯·卡拉扬和里卡多·穆蒂）执导。鉴于表演者的素质，两者在技术上都很完美——但一个有点无菌，而另一个则绝对传达了死亡之谜的伟大（我会让读者猜猜哪个是哪个，以免引起任何一个阵营的愤怒！回到技术问题，古典音乐被广泛认为比流行音乐或摇滚音乐具有更高的技术标准，而且通常要复杂得多。然而，有一些非常有趣的重金属或民间音乐（例如），其精致程度可能与古典音乐相当。也许复杂性可以成为伟大的补充基准？
As for the objective or quantifiable criterion for greatness: will a specific artwork ‘say something’ to viewers or listeners across the ages? In my humble opinion, if a Renaissance altarpiece touches the hearts of both fifteenth century Flemish worshippers and today’s contemporary secular museum-goers, then, perhaps, it may be considered to be a great work of art.
至于伟大的客观或可量化的标准：一件特定的艺术品会向各个 时代的 观众或听众“说些什么”吗？以我的拙见，如果一幅文艺复兴时期的祭坛画触动了 15 世纪佛兰德斯崇拜者 和 当今当代世俗博物馆参观者的心，那么，也许，它可以被认为是一件伟大的艺术品。
Dr Fabio Noviello, Cardiff
Fabio Noviello 博士，卡迪夫
The best way to approach this question is to start with how art works in any medium. We tend to think of it as reflecting the world, but as Deleuze and Guatarri argue in A Thousand Plateaus (1980) concerning books, artworks don’t reflect the world so much as they form a rhizome with it. Their rhizomatic approach imagines a complex matrix of roots that comes from all directions and has no center – as compared to an arborescent approach (based on tree-like structures), in which there is a first cause or base – something like a trunk from which the branches and foliage break away. As an example, think about Alice in Wonderland. You may tend to imagine it in a Tim Burton kind of way: a lush, colorful landscape, like the art of Henri Rousseau. But when you read the books, the prose is actually threadbare and only gives you the minimal information needed – a room, a table, a cake, Alice growing bigger and smaller with each bite – as well as a lot of absurd dialogue. All the detail was added as it made its way through history, spreading out with cultural filaments into new ideas and takes. But it remains significant within the matrix it works in. That same dynamic is at work in every other work we consider great. This is why the term ‘greatness’, like the term ‘genius’, is best left to historians. If something an artist creates is designated ‘great’, it means it blew people away in that given moment. That would be flattering in itself; but that effect can pass. If historians are still talking about it a hundred years later, it’s only if it remains a significant node within the rhizomatic network. In short: artistic greatness is what maintains its position in the general discourse.
解决这个问题的最好方法是从艺术在任何媒介中如何运作开始。我们倾向于认为它反映了世界，但正如德勒兹和瓜塔里在《一 千个高原 》（1980）中关于书籍的论证一样，艺术品与其说是反映世界，不如说是与世界形成根 茎 。他们的根茎方法想象了一个复杂的根基质，它来自四面八方，没有中心——与树木方法（基于树状结构）相比，树 木 方法（基于树状结构）有一个第一个原因或基础——就像树干一样，树枝和树叶从中分离出来。例如，想想 爱丽丝梦游仙境。 你可能倾向于以蒂姆·伯顿的方式想象它：郁郁葱葱、色彩缤纷的风景，就像亨利·卢梭的艺术一样。但当你读这些书时，散文实际上很陈旧，只给你所需的最少信息——一个房间、一张桌子、一个蛋糕、爱丽丝每咬一口就变大变小——以及很多荒谬的对话。所有的细节都是在历史中传播的，随着文化丝材传播到新的想法和镜头中。但它在它工作的矩阵中仍然很重要。同样的动力也在我们认为伟大的所有其他作品中发挥作用。这就是为什么“伟大”一词，就像“天才”一词一样，最好留给历史学家。如果艺术家创作的东西被指定为“伟大”，这意味着它在那个特定时刻让人们大吃一惊。这本身就很讨人喜欢;但这种影响可能会过去。如果一百年后历史学家仍在谈论它，那只是当它仍然是根茎网络中的一个重要节点时。简而言之：艺术的伟大是维持其在一般话语中的地位的原因。
D E Tarkington, Bellevue, Nebraska
DE Tarkington，内布拉斯加州贝尔维尤
One could argue that great art endures over time and continues to speak to future generations, but that’s too simplistic. When we try to define what the concept of ‘greatness’ entails in art, we come to various qualities such as originality (though not for its own sake, as Roger Scruton aptly noted, but that which emerges from the creator’s meaningful engagement with tradition); technical mastery; the power to make us see the world – and ourselves – differently; the ability to evoke a cathartic experience; and, of course, beauty. Yet beauty, as E.H. Gombrich pointed out, is not a fixed category – what moves one generation aesthetically may seem merely sentimental to another. Moreover, in the twentieth century beauty lost its privileged status in Western art to values such as imperfection and asymmetry. We arguably now live in a post-beauty era, where traditional harmony has given way to fragmentation and experimentation.
有人可能会说，伟大的艺术会随着时间的推移而经久不衰，并继续与后代对话，但这太简单了。当我们试图定义“伟大”概念在艺术中意味着什么时，我们会想到各种品质，例如原创性（尽管正如罗杰·斯克鲁顿恰当地指出的那样，不是为了原创性本身，而是创作者与传统的有意义的接触中产生的品质）;掌握技术;让我们以不同的方式看待世界和我们自己的力量;唤起宣泄体验的能力;当然，还有美丽。然而，正如 E.H. Gombrich 所指出的，美并不是一个固定的类别——在审美上感动一代人的东西对另一代人来说可能只是感伤的。此外，在二十世纪，美在西方艺术中失去了特权地位，导致不完美和不对称等价值观。可以说，我们现在生活在一个后美容时代，传统的和谐已经让位于碎片化和实验。
The issue grows more complex when we consider the concept of taste. According to Immanuel Kant, aesthetic judgements are subjective yet they claim universality. This raises the question: must we cultivate taste to recognize greatness? History shows critics often praised works that faded while overlooking others that since entered the canon. As John Berger famously proposed, the way we see art is always conditioned by cultural and ideological frameworks.
当我们考虑口味的概念时，这个问题变得更加复杂。根据伊曼纽尔·康德的说法，审美判断是主观的，但它们声称具有普遍性。这就提出了一个问题：我们必须培养品味才能认识到伟大吗？历史表明，评论家经常赞扬那些褪色的作品，而忽视了其他后来进入经典的作品。正如约翰·伯杰（John Berger）的著名观点，我们看待艺术的方式总是受到文化和意识形态框架的制约。
Does this mean that greatness is merely a cultural construct? Is ‘aesthetic relativism’ our only conclusion? And yet our intuition resists this. We return, again and again, to particular works: the epics of Homer, the ink-wash landscapes of Sesshu Toyo, the music of Bach, and the ancient guqin melodies of China. These works seem to move us meaningfully towards a deeper understanding of what it means to be a human being.
这是否意味着伟大只是一种文化建构？“审美相对主义”是我们唯一的结论吗？然而，我们的直觉却抵制了这一点。我们一次又一次地回到特定的作品：荷马的史诗、东代雪州的水墨山水、巴赫的音乐以及中国古老的古琴旋律。这些作品似乎有意义地推动我们更深入地理解作为一个人意味着什么。
Perhaps, then, philosophicalness is what makes a work of art truly great. Art moves us for various reasons: its beauty, craftsmanship, or even its capacity to shock. However, some art enacts a kind of philosophy by inviting us to dwell in life’s mysteries, or by helping us to cope with its tragedies, such as the proximity of death. Thus, I can’t help but conclude that great art endures not because we declare it so, but because it perpetually returns us to the timeless question of what it means to be human.
那么，也许 哲学才是 使一件艺术作品真正伟大的原因。艺术感动我们的原因有很多：它的美丽、工艺，甚至是它令人震惊的能力。然而，有些艺术通过邀请我们沉迷于生命的奥秘中，或者通过帮助我们应对生命的悲剧，例如死亡的临近，来制定一种哲学。因此，我不禁得出结论，伟大的艺术之所以经久不衰，不是因为我们如此宣称它，而是因为它永远让我们回到一个永恒的问题，即人类意味着什么。
Milda Varnienė, Vilnius, Lithuania
Milda Varnienė， 维尔纽斯， 立陶宛
This question is difficult partly because people react differently to the same work of art. One person may look at the work of an artist such as Picasso and step back in awe, another recoil with horror. So I incline towards Benedetto Croce’s concept of ‘intuition’: we seem to have an instinctual reaction to what we feel is great art, focusing upon how we personally identify with it, and what we believe it expresses. Furthermore, we may emphasise different criteria in a work of art as what makes it great: regarding a certain painting, some may emphasis the composition, others the use of colour. Although this may imply the platitude that ‘all art is subjective’ – that whether a work of art is great or terrible is a matter of personal taste – I don’t think it necessarily does. There is often consensus on great art that transcends national and cultural boundaries. The work of Shakespeare is globally widely considered amongst the greatest theatre ever created, and it has been adapted many times in forms far removed from the original. The films of Japanese director Akira Kurosawa, Throne of Blood and Ran, based upon Macbeth and King Lear respectively, are considered amongst the greatest-ever versions of these plays.
这个问题很困难，部分原因是人们对同一件艺术作品的反应不同。一个人可能会看到毕加索等艺术家的作品，敬畏地退后一步，另一个人可能会惊恐地退缩。因此，我倾向于贝内代托·克罗齐的“直觉”概念：我们似乎对我们认为是伟大艺术的东西有一种本能的反应，关注我们个人如何认同它，以及我们相信它表达了什么。此外，我们可能会强调一件艺术作品的不同标准，作为它的伟大之处：对于某幅画，有些人可能强调构图，有些人可能会强调色彩的使用。尽管这可能暗示了“所有艺术都是主观的”的陈词滥调——一件艺术作品是伟大还是糟糕是个人品味的问题——但我认为它不一定是。对于超越国家和文化界限的伟大艺术，人们往往会达成共识。莎士比亚的作品在全球范围内被广泛认为是有史以来最伟大的戏剧之一，并且它被多次改编为与原作相去甚远的形式。日本导演黑泽明的电影《 血之王座 》和《 乱》 分别根据 《麦克白》 和 《李尔王》 改编，被认为是这些戏剧有史以来最伟大的版本之一。
Furthermore, art is often complex and multifaceted, so our reaction is not likely to be as one-dimensional as outright love or hate. Even if someone (like me) is not a great fan of Wagner, they may admit that his Ring Cycle deals with great themes (including hubris, greed, faithfulness) and should be appreciated for this: they just don’t like the music. This might suggest that universal human themes within the artwork are what makes a work of art great. As Aristotle says, the study of history is less important than that of art, as the first is concerned with the specific, the second, the universal. Many people who have looked at a Byzantine mosaic, listened to a medieval madrigal. or watched a performance of an ancient Greek tragedy, and felt deeply, and intuitively, that they have experienced great art, are liable to concur with Aristotle’s sentiment.
此外，艺术通常是复杂且多方面的，因此我们的反应不太可能像彻头彻尾的爱或恨那样一维。即使有人（像我一样）不是瓦格纳的忠实粉丝，他们也可能承认他的 《指环》 涉及伟大的主题（包括傲慢、贪婪、忠诚），并且应该因此受到赞赏：他们只是不喜欢音乐。这可能表明，艺术品中普遍的人类主题是一件艺术作品的伟大之处。正如亚里士多德所说，历史研究不如艺术重要，因为第一个关注的是具体的，第二个关注的是普遍的。许多看过拜占庭马赛克的人，都听过中世纪的牧歌。或者观看了古希腊悲剧的表演，并深刻地、直观地感受到他们经历了伟大的艺术，很容易同意亚里士多德的观点。
Jonathan Tipton, Penwortham, Lancashire
乔纳森·蒂普顿，兰开夏郡彭沃瑟姆
Art’s private or public commissioning and curating in historical, economic, social, and cultural contexts significantly affects its reception, that is, its perceived significance and value. But what makes an artwork great can be explained using Aristotle’s four causes: the material, efficient, formal and final causes. These causes suggest an approach that covers a range of significant factors bearing on a work of art being great. Since artworks comprise a considerable range of features, this is desirable.
艺术在历史、经济、社会和文化背景下的私人或公共委托和策展极大地影响了它的接受度，即它的感知意义和价值。但是，是什么让一件艺术品 变得伟大 ，可以用亚里士多德的四个原因来解释： 材料 原因、 效率 原因、 形式 原因和最终原因 。这些原因表明，一种方法涵盖了与一件艺术品伟大相关的一系列重要因素。由于艺术品包含相当多的特征，因此这是可取的。
Artworks typically have material properties sourced from the physical world, comprising animal, vegetable and mineral elements treated and combined to provide the medium. The hard- and software of digital technologies have supplemented material resources, too. Then, through the consummate application of craft and technical skill, artists and their collaborators can engage with their medium in creatively unprecedented ways, These creative features are Aristotelian efficient causes, meaning, they’re concerned with how the artwork comes about through time.
艺术品通常具有来自物理世界的 材料 属性，包括经过处理和组合以提供媒介的动物、植物和矿物元素。数字技术的硬件和软件也补充了物质资源。然后，通过对工艺和技术技能的完美应用，艺术家和他们的合作者可以以前所未有的创造性方式与他们的媒介互动，这些创造性特征是亚里士多德式的 有效 原因，这意味着，他们关心艺术品是如何随着时间的推移而产生的。
The formal cause has to do with the nature of the work considered in the abstract. The manifestations that an artwork can take are first conceived by anticipating the particular structure and design that will instantiate the artwork. The form also characteristically relates to different overall configurations of the arts, including movements, schools, and styles – as encompassed, say, by Realism, Romanticism, Classicism, and Modernism. Great art can also result in the formation of unprecedented forms. The final cause – the purpose of a work of art – is realised in diverse ways – which have been explored in the many contributions that have sought to address what constitutes great art, including cultural history, sociology, aesthetics, criticism, and curation.
形式 原因与抽象中考虑的工作的性质有关。艺术品可以采取的表现形式首先是通过预测将实例化艺术品的特定结构和设计来构思的。这种形式还具有特征，涉及艺术的不同整体配置，包括运动、流派和风格——例如现实主义、浪漫主义、古典主义和现代主义。伟大的艺术也可以导致前所未有的形式的形成。 最终的原因 ——艺术作品的 目的 ——以多种方式实现——在许多试图解决伟大艺术构成的贡献中得到了探索，包括文化史、社会学、美学、批评和策展。
Opinions range from those supportive or celebratory of represented cultural values and beliefs (e.g. Ken Clark in Civilisation), and those which are critical of them, such as John Berger. The protagonists of such apparently opposing positions then dialogue within an ‘aesthetic dimension’ (Marcuse) to establish what contingently comes to be regarded as ‘great art’.
意见不一，既有支持或赞扬所代表的文化价值观和信仰的（例如《 文明 》中的肯·克拉克），也有批评它们的，如约翰·伯杰。然后，这些明显对立立场的主角在“美学维度”（马尔库塞）内进行对话，以建立不断被视为“伟大艺术”的东西。
Colin Brookes, Loughborough
科林·布鲁克斯，拉夫堡
Defining an objective measure of greatness seems a forlorn task. Not only do people not agree on which characteristics are criteria of value, even when they do they can disagree on whether a particular work meets those criteria.
定义伟大的客观衡量标准似乎是一项艰巨的任务。人们不仅不同意哪些特征是价值标准，即使他们同意，他们也可能对特定作品是否符合这些标准存在分歧。
Some have argued that the value of a work depends on its organic unity, by which they mean the way it combines diverse elements into a coherent whole. However, adopting this view does not settle disagreements as to whether or not unity has been achieved. It also seems to preclude miniatures (in any medium) from being great.
一些人认为，作品的价值取决于其有机统一性，这意味着它将不同的元素组合成一个连贯的整体的方式。然而，采用这一观点并不能解决关于是否实现统一的分歧。它似乎也排除了微缩模型（在任何媒体中）都无法成为伟大的。
Although no work receives universal approval from all those who experience it, there are common responses to works that people describe as great: it can cause a visceral reaction, such as tears or whoops of joy (though some might say that sentimentalism can do this, so it’s not evidence of greatness); it inspires a drive to re-experience the work; each experience of the work feels new and reveals new detail, although it may initially be hard to appreciate; it seems (close to) unimprovable; and it is experienced as uplifting in some way. If a work of art induces the ‘this is great’ response in a significant number of people – enough for it to find an enduring audience – then maybe this indicates that it has a kind of objective greatness. I don’t much care for the symphonies of Mahler, for example, but many people sincerely regard them as great, so maybe I should accept that they are.
尽管没有作品能得到所有经历过它的人的普遍认可，但人们对被描述为伟大的作品有共同的反应：它会引起本能的反应，例如流泪或喜悦的呜呜声（尽管有些人可能会说感伤主义可以做到这一点，所以这不是伟大的证据）;它激发了重新体验作品的动力;作品的每一次体验都让人感觉很新，揭示了新的细节，尽管最初可能很难欣赏;它似乎（接近）无法改进;它在某种程度上被体验为令人振奋的。如果一件艺术作品在相当多的人中引起了“这很棒”的反应——足以让它找到持久的观众——那么这也许表明它有一种客观的伟大。例如，我不太关心马勒的交响曲，但许多人真诚地认为它们是伟大的，所以也许我应该接受它们是伟大的。
Paul Western, Bath 保罗·韦斯特，巴斯
No art can be considered great
没有艺术可以被认为是伟大的
Except that which moves the heart to ache:
除了那些使心痛的事物：
The slip of paint, the canvas wet
油漆的滑落，画布湿漉漉的
That forest or face we can’t forget.
那片我们无法忘记的森林或面孔。
No art should be considered great
任何艺术都不应被认为是伟大的
Unless it stirs the mind to wake:
除非它能唤醒心灵：
Great art conveys the verb ‘to be’
伟大的艺术传达了动词“to be”
In personal philosophy,在个人哲学中，
Shows the opened eyes new ways to see
向睁开的眼睛展示新的观看方式
Beyond commercialism monetary.
超越商业主义 货币。
Greatness of art is judged by you and me:
艺术的伟大由你我来评判：
Form and figure, expression, line,
形与形、表情、线条、
Shades that shape the sweet sublime,
塑造甜美崇高的色调，
For art reflects who we are
因为艺术反映了我们是谁
In image, beauty, mask and mirror.
在图像、美、面具和镜子中。
Let no expert henceforth decree
从今以后，任何专家都不要下令
What art should mean to you and me:
艺术对你我来说应该意味着什么：
Nothing usurps subjectivity
没有什么可以篡夺主观性
In the meaning-making of creativity.
在创造力的意义创造中。
For as the great philosophers knew,
因为正如伟大的哲学家所知道的，
The act of making gives life value.
制作行为赋予生命价值。
Readers, therefore, make no mistake
因此，读者不会搞错
Be bold, be free, in joy create,
大胆，自由，喜乐地创造，
Art with passion and purpose defines what’s great.
充满激情和目标的艺术定义了伟大。
Bianca Laleh, Totnes, Devon
Bianca Laleh，托特尼斯，德文郡