Who will help me write my paper on introduction to art!

Sociology of art is a very important branch in the art discipline system. Grosse, 1862- 1927) brilliantly pointed out in the second chapter "The Method of Art Science" of his masterpiece "The Origin of Art" (1894) more than 100 years ago: "The problem of art science is to describe and explain many phenomena contained in art concepts, including personal problems and social problems." The first form of art science is psychological, but the second form is sociological. (The Commercial Press, 2nd edition, 1984, page 7, page 10) Here, he attaches great importance to the study of sociology of art, that is, the important position of sociology of art in the art system. His views are still insightful. It can be said that art sociology, like art psychology, is an important subject in art, and art sociology is also a traditional art subject with a long history. As we all know, Gross is famous for studying the art of primitive people and tracing the origin of art by ethnology. Gross himself regards ethnographic art research as a social form of art research, that is, a new research method and a new theoretical trend within the scope of art sociology research. It should be pointed out that when Gross made the above remarks, sociology of art was no longer a new discipline. According to Gross's review of the academic history of this discipline (1), this discipline can be traced back to1Du Bo at the beginning of the 8th century: "The social form of art science has been put forward and studied for a long time. The first person who studied art as a social phenomenon was Du Yao Lao (A Xian eDI plus S). As for why different nationalities have different artistic talents in different periods, he has already begun to study in the' Criticism and Inspection of Poetry and Painting' written by 17 19. " (See page 10 above) The man translated by the translator of The Origin of Art as "an old man with a long wavelength" is a French Catholic priest. Today, he is generally translated as Bo Du or Dubos (1670- 1742), an art critic and historian who made important contributions to French art theory at the beginning of18th century. After Du Bo, Grosse mainly quoted three scholars who made great contributions to the study of sociology of art: one was Herder (now generally translated as Herder, 1744- 1803, a German enlightenment thinker and writer): "His works are full of universal thoughts that the nation and climate have a deep influence on poetry." (See previous page 10) One is Tanner (1828-893): in his representative works, The History of English Literature (1863) and Philosophy of Art (1882), he expounded three races that influenced art. 1854- 1888): "Art is and social organisms are very important for the maintenance and development of art-this idea is full of Ju You's mind, and she published it with great eloquence." (See last page 14) Her masterpiece of sociology of art is Art from Sociology (1590). Gross has published The Origin of Art for more than a century ... The discipline of sociology of art has made great progress in the past 100 years (this book is briefly described). Even from the perspective of the concept of sociology of art and its introduction into China, it has a history of about a century. Liang Qichao's article "On the Relationship between Fiction and Group Governance" published in 1902 discusses the close relationship between fiction, an art form that he considers as "the best in literature", and social politics (group governance), especially the bourgeois reformist politics advocated by him, which embodies some concepts of literary sociology. As we know, the name "sociology" was translated into "ethnology" when it was first introduced into China. Lu Xun criticized some theories of "the unity of poetry and morality" in his famous paper "On Moro Poetry" written in 1907 (published in 1908). This is not only a criticism of the traditional theory of innocence and the theory of "holding human nature" in poetry, but also a criticism of some sociological literary views with moral rules (norms) in western literature. This shows that in the first decade of the 20th century, some concepts of sociology of literature and sociology of art were introduced into our country, which caused people's different understanding of it and journal of yunnan arts institute's different attitude towards it. Get restored. Li Zehou, a famous aesthetician, published the article "The Object and Scope of Aesthetics" in the third issue of1981"Beauty in the 1920s and 1930s as a Scientific Sociology of Art", arguing that the subject of aesthetics has been fully introduced into China's art theory circle. Tanner, Juyou and Gross's research scope includes philosophy of beauty, aesthetic psychology and sociology of art, and their views and works on sociology of art have been introduced and translated. In other words, sociology of art is an important part of aesthetics. In particular, Marxist art theory was introduced into China and gained a huge share in this field. Since art theory, art criticism and art history took root, blossomed and produced results, it has itself included the artistic and social aspects of Marxism. Since then, sociology of art or Japanese "literary viewpoints and achievements have also been translated and introduced within the aesthetic framework, which has produced a far-reaching sociology of art" and achieved a number of noteworthy achievements. Lu Xun took the lead in translating plekhanov's On Art and Lu Guo, among which there were some systematic research monographs, which had great influence. But this is the same as Tsarski's Literature and Criticism, and when Feng Xuefeng translated plekhanov, he put forward a subjective position and relationship of art sociology (art and social life and Luna Charles' art society have vertical implication and horizontal interdisciplinary relationship): the basis of obedience, and so on. Why not introduce the classics of Marxist sociology of art into China with "aesthetic works"? However, while translating and introducing the corresponding "aesthetic sociology" or the achievements of artistic sociology, we also pay attention to some vulgar and simplified "artistic sociology". If art is a part of aesthetics, it mechanically explains the linear causal sociology between art and social economy and class struggle, including art theory, art history and art criticism, and then the vulgar sociology related to it lacks identification. For example, the art of the Soviet artist Fritsch. Then, in addition to the sociological study of art, there is also a book, Sociology of Art, which is actually a sociological work of art, with other research methods and other branches with strong vulgar sociological colors, such as artistic psychology and artistic color. But before the liberation of China, there were at least five surgical pathology, art physiology, art culture and so on. In the three Chinese versions at that time, namely, Chen (Wang Dao), Hu, Liu Naou, and discussions, some scholars thought that sociology of art should not belong to Mei Tianxing and other five versions. Moreover, Fritsch should come to Hanov as a branch of sociology, which is regarded by some as a positive construction of Marxist art. It should be said that the sociology of art can be unified from the perspective of sociology, and the authority of Marxist sociology of art has been endowed with inappropriate manpower. As a branch of sociology, there is discussion, but art is praised and evaluated. I'm afraid Fritch's vulgar sociology and mechanical materialism sociology can't be completely classified into sociology. It should also be wrong (in fact, in plekhanov's art theory, there are some simple mechanical explanations of the wrong factors of the causal relationship between art and social production and class in the 1980s and 1990s, and J "is an important thing in the humanities and social sciences of Fritsch and belleville. This is the representative figure of vulgar sociology, such as Zefu, who further developed his theory and re-proposed the establishment of "art study" in the field of art research, but it did not get due analysis and criticism. The problem of usability. In the field of art research, theoretical and disciplinary reflections on how to accurately understand and explain the construction of Marxist sociology of art have been widely carried out. Over the past ten years, in the field of art, a large number of art research monographs based on Marxist social philosophy and art theory have been published, such as Meta Art and Modern Art. It is still an academic subject to be explored to build a scientific system of art sociology, such as Introduction to Art, Art, Art of China and Art Writing. Chemistry, art mastery, art typology and art psychology after the new liberation have been extended to art history and philosophy due to the influence of "Left" thinking. Some colleges and universities have established art departments and art research institutes in a certain economic base, political superstructure and a certain era, but they don't have doctoral degrees in art, simply marking the class struggle as a causal link. This year, the sociological viewpoint of China Academy of Fine Arts was popular for a while, but it was really a scientific art club and the highest scientific research institution of fine arts in China, but it was regarded as "bourgeois science" together with sociology. In sharp contrast, in the west, the foundation of doctoral programs in sociology of art and horizontal disciplines is declared to China! A few months ago, the only sociology of art and literature became an outstanding research, many important first-class disciplines of art were approved, and Meng Gan began to recruit as a first-class research achievement. It also includes the valuable academic exploration made by Bobo, a graduate student of art (general art) as a western Marxist discipline. It shows that, with the joint efforts of the art scientific community, art, as a modern person in China, has once again entered a new basic discipline in a complex society and in the system of knowledge, and its heyday has been generally established before, after history entered a "new period". At that time, with the rise and decline of "the upsurge of beautifying one's dominant position in China's current scientific system", the products of Zheng Jie's sociology were also within the framework of aesthetics (down to 23%). Journal of yunnan arts institute 2003.4- 18 has a broad research interface and various research methods. With the introduction of the theoretical framework of reception and interpretation, comparative literature has found a fascinating and flexible space in the openness of text research. Modern hermeneutics holds that the aesthetic structure of the text contains a pluralistic "meaning whole", which cannot be completely opened to readers at the first reading; The generation and development of text meaning is a relative and infinite process towards the future, and the reinterpretation of text interpretation is a rational behavior in the dynamic generation of text meaning, not an academic random choice. 7.5) Although the compatibility of comparative literature has attracted a lot of criticism from traditional scholars who think that it has no characteristics of its own discipline, I firmly believe that it is a vibrant discipline; Hermeneutics alone provides a diverse space for its vitality. When I read the Golden Branch and its related documents, I am more willing to see the integration of internal methods of humanities and sociology. Of course, the original text of hermeneutics is still a working text, not a "golden branch" deep in the primeval forest or a natural object exposed by Mu Feng in the field, but their research principles and the formation process of cultural history have many similarities and similarities. In other words, the application of anthropological research methods in literary research will have a broader academic prospect. René Wellek once said: "The anthropological criticism of literature is the most vital wing of contemporary literary criticism." Eating "1" literature and anthropology are of course two independent disciplines, each with its own research objects, categories and methods, but what is important is whether we find the vision and methods we need from the docking of disciplines. Do you have the courage to break? Did you break that golden branch? Do you have the ability to appreciate the magnificence and beauty of gold leaves? Perhaps this is the book "Golden Branch" that gives me the greatest help and inspiration. The narrative language of "Golden Branch" is vivid, popular and interesting, and it is easy to guide readers to follow the sword imagined by the author and roam the witchcraft cultural space in ancient times. A large number of examples can easily arouse readers' cultural associations. Although it is in the background of different places and cultures, it can stimulate readers to make a comparative study of similar events in eastern and western cultures. This article is my feeling. According to the inherent logical relationship between discipline and research, it is not only necessary but also possible to redefine the disciplinary status of sociology of art and its disciplinary relationship. An important academic mission of Song Jianlin's new book "Sociology of Art" is to carefully sort out the disciplinary relationship of Sociology of Art and scientifically position Sociology of Art, so that Sociology of Art can become an important branch of art, which is juxtaposed with the sub-disciplines of Art Psychology, Art Typology and Art Culture. In my opinion, this orientation has brought the sociology of art back to its original disciplinary position and relationship, which is closely related to Luo Zhai's definition of the disciplinary position of sociology of art and the relationship between learning and benefit more than 0/00 years ago. This orientation is conducive to the integrity of the discipline system of art, and also to the constant attention and discussion of sociology of art as a regular discipline in the discipline system of art, thus ending its wandering in other disciplines and returning home. This monograph by Song Jianlin not only solves the problem of discipline orientation of sociology of art, but also makes a systematic and innovative discussion on this subject. In his works, he widely absorbed the beneficial achievements of sociology of art and sociology of literature since the new period, especially in several key chapters, such as the interactive relationship between art and society, social production of art, social communication of art, and social consumption of art, and made constructive research, which made the thinking and exploration of related issues more profound and dialectical than before. This discussion will help to promote the development of art sociology. Comrade Song Jianlin has made unremitting efforts in the field of art and aesthetics for a long time. He has completed monographs "History of Architectural Sculpture in Ming Dynasty" and "History of Architectural Sculpture in Qing Dynasty", and published his co-authored works "Art Typology", "Contemporary Literary Thoughts in China", "Chun Run Wen Xin" and "Master of Literature". , and edited the world classics handed down from ancient times (* * * eight volumes). As the first deputy editor-in-chief, he participated in the compilation of medium-sized literary theory reference books such as Dictionary of Literary Origin and Complete Stories of Purple Bamboo Slips (* * *). In recent years, he has devoted himself to the research project of "Sociology of Art" of China Academy of Art, and finally recently completed this weighty academic monograph that has condensed his hard work for many years. I sincerely congratulate him on the appearance of this artistic research achievement.