So Plato was opposed to imitation, and it was precisely in his opposition to imitation that he proposed the theory of artistic mimesis. He also raised the question of “what should be imitated,” and for this reason, he advocated expelling painters and even poets from his ideal republic. This is the rationale behind it. To be honest, here we are essentially saying that by observing forms and capturing images, we borrow from Western literary theory to call it “observing objects to grasp forms.” That is why in the West, painting and sculpture are referred to as plastic arts. In reality, what did our ancient sages and ancestors do? They observed objects to capture images. What are images? They capture the divine aspect. Look, didn’t Gu Kaizhi advocate “conveying spirit through form”? Right? The spirit lies within. Laozi also discussed this in Chapter 21: “The Dao, as a thing, is elusive and vague. Yet within its vagueness and elusiveness, there is image.” Image is a kind of energy, a spiritual entity. Once you understand this and transform it into an internal way of perception, you won’t rigidly think, “You say this painting is beautiful—where is the beauty? Point it out to me.” Where is the beauty? If you try to pinpoint it, the beauty vanishes. This is because aesthetic appreciation is an interplay between our lives and the world—it is the way our existence interacts with the world, a radiant reception of the very essence of our being. Thus, aesthetic appreciation is a spiritual light. As Mencius said, “Fullness is called beauty; fullness with radiance is called greatness.” Greatness is what transforms into sagehood—the sagehood of sages. When even sages cannot comprehend it, what is it? It is divinity, right? Understanding this is far from as difficult as we initially thought, isn’t it? So, the Eight Trigrams convey information through images—through “image-based communication.” This “communication” means dissemination, expression, and manifestation. That is the idea.
发表回复
要发表评论，您必须先登录。