The Fifth Season

【并非附庸风雅】

路易十五受乾隆皇帝之托

以及当今NYT的评论

The Strange Tale of a Chinese Emperor’s French Prints

中国前统治者缘何背离传统，炫耀侵略

　东西文化一相遇，就会产生一些奇闻异事。如今，在巴黎卢浮宫展出的44幅18世纪法国版画就透露出这样的、少有的离奇故事之一。这批绘画以“中国皇帝的战功：路易十五受乾隆皇帝之托而定制的版画”为主题，直到5月18日之前都在卢浮宫展出。(chinesenewsnet.com)

从1755到1759年，乾隆（1735－1796）派遣军队攻占蒙古，并再接再厉，占领维吾尔族居住的辽阔西域，也就是现在的新疆。版画是依据皇帝的旨意制作而成，美化了那场战争的残酷现实。但是，传统的中国人受正宗儒家思想的影响，是不喜欢以侵略他族为荣的。(chinesenewsnet.com)

法王受乾隆之托定制版画(chinesenewsnet.com)

"从凡尔赛到紫禁城──罗浮宫馆藏铜版画展"中拥有无数价值非凡的版画，而对于中国观众而言，其中一套作品，"中国皇朝战役-罗浮宫博物馆之艾德蒙．德罗希尔版画收藏系列"特别值得玩味。（资料图片）
(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　纽约时报刊登知名艺术批评家苏伦•麦理肯（Souren Melikian）的一篇题为“奇怪的故事：中国皇帝的法国版画”（The Strange Tale of a Chinese Emperor’s French Prints）的文章。文章说，这场耗民伤财的战争毫无经济或者文化动机而非打不可。远古时期，这片土地居住著被称为索格底人（Sogdians）的伊朗民族，通过遗留下来的物品和纺织品的证据判断，他们早在公元7世纪就定居于此。维吾尔人随著土耳其语系民族的西迁运动的扩展，慢慢地渗入此地，一两个世纪后，他们就在之后的1,100年里把这里当作了他们的家乡。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　早期维吾尔人崇信佛教，也有少数人信仰基督教。不过，随著中亚波斯语系城市的传教士的到来，他们渐渐地成为伊斯兰信徒。不过，这一切都不足以使他们成为中国的眼中钉和后来被攻击的原因。(chinesenewsnet.com)

乾隆皇帝西征动机是什么(chinesenewsnet.com)

多维专访：应付国内舆论，萨科齐…
深度： 中日在安理会就朝火箭问题产生严重…
互动： 多维专访：应付国内舆论，萨科齐再…
中国： 涉嫌助伊朗发展导弹 中国商人列美…
国际： 美国首都华盛顿最美的樱花节
视频： 新闻联播20090407
热炒中国楼市让外银损失惨重
娱乐： 性感恬淡李丽珍阔别银幕5年 再见…
体育： 姚明20分16板力压魔兽 街球王…
论坛： 舞蹈系女生放学后的精彩场景

　　麦理肯在文章中提出，那么，为什么清朝的统治者会发动对这片土地的西征，乾隆皇帝的动机是什么？是再现历史上有过的征服欲望吗？公元一、二世纪，汉朝曾经到达了统治的高峰，并在名义上统治著这片土地。数世纪后，蒙古人征服世界，横扫欧亚的铁蹄也曾踏上维吾尔人的土地。但是，十一、十二世纪，带领中国走向新文化高峰的宋朝对这类战事显得毫无兴趣。在蒙古人之后重建汉人王朝的明朝也从未有兴趣踏足此地。(chinesenewsnet.com)

从凡尔赛到紫禁城──罗浮宫馆藏铜版画展（资料图片）
(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　那么，到底是什么原因让一位统治著中国庞大国土的皇帝派遣军队穿过环境恶劣的大沙漠，征服这一片无论是物质上，还是文化上都与他的属地格格不入的不毛之地呢？还有，中国皇帝到底为什么会委托法国艺术家把16幅同样是西方艺术家作品的油画重制为铜版画，作为自己的这些征战纪念呢？(chinesenewsnet.com)

耗时7年才完工(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　委托制作这些版画的圣旨只有经过1765年7月的法文翻译，被部分保留了下来，上面写的是：“我想把16幅由朗世宁（耶稣信徒Giuseppe Castiglione的中文名）以及其他为我服务的欧洲画家绘制的，描绘我胜利征服突厥和周遭穆斯林众国征战的图画送往欧洲，并选出最优秀的技工，由他们将此雕刻在铜版上。”乾隆先送了4幅至欧洲，每幅都先印了100张，并与铜版一起送往中国。剩下的12幅原本应该分批送往欧洲。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　事情进行得并非一帆风顺。负责本次展览的卢浮宫馆长帕斯卡•托雷斯（Pascal Torres）在展览说明书中讲述道，第一批图画于1766年1月21日离开广州，于同年8月10日与皇帝圣旨一起到达巴黎，可是，被东印度公司一直扣留到12月17日。(chinesenewsnet.com)

画面展现的是满清攻打新疆。（资料图片）
(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　托雷斯先生猜测，东印度公司可能是担心如果整个过程中出现任何差错，从而得罪乾隆皇帝。公司的经理人听到谣言说，把图画送往法国的命令并不是皇帝自己下达的，而是广东当地的下级官员。因此他们必须花时间弄清楚到底是怎么回事，这当然对他们是十分重要的。(chinesenewsnet.com)

版画的制作工作从1767年开始，直到1774年才竣工。主持版画制作的是最优秀的腐蚀铜版术大师柯钦（Charles-Nicolas Cochin），而且，完工后他还用雕刻刀重新在铜版上加工，使得画面轮廓更加清晰，对比更加鲜明。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　当时，实际的完成量比乾隆下令刻制的多出来了一些。于1774年登基的路易十六国王在他位于凡尔赛的私人住所中挂有一幅。其他的都被分给手下大臣们。埃德蒙•德•罗斯柴尔德男爵(Baron Edmond de Rothschild)曾于20世纪取得一幅，并于1935年捐给了卢浮宫。(chinesenewsnet.com)

2007年出品的电视剧《宫廷画师朗世宁》由加拿大人大山扮演（资料图片）
　　纯系乾隆帝自我满足成就感(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　麦理肯写道，从艺术作品的角度来看，这些版画比19世纪印刷的儿童画册好不到哪里去。然而作为文化历史之谜，它们却是无可匹敌的。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　这个系列的版画与中国艺术毫无联系。乾隆写过赞颂自己征战胜利的诗篇，依照中国传统，这些诗应当出现在版画上，但事实上并没有看到。托雷斯先生认为，皇帝的这次委托，只是一种政治“宣传”的手法。但是，宣传的目标是谁呢？有效的宣传图像必须有立杆见影的一面。如果要给中国人看，它们就不应该让中国人感觉到很陌生，用外国的作品来宣传，就更不合适了，显然，这些法国版画，对远东的公众来说，特别是深受中国传统艺术和文化熏陶的文人学子来说，肯定是有这种疏离的感觉的。而且，这批版画的法国刻板印刷并没有超过200份。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　最终的结论似乎只能是，乾隆委托制作的这个系列的版画纯粹是乾隆皇帝出于自我满足的成就感而为，很可能也是为了提醒他的臣下们要铭记皇上的丰功伟绩。(chinesenewsnet.com)

从版画到圆明园看西风东渐(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　但是，为什么会用欧洲版画呢？虽然，之后那些中国版的版画上刻有了中文，但是，它们的风格依然与中国艺术风格有很大差异，很难立即引发中国人的共鸣。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　这引起了一个人们探讨的更广泛的问题，这些版画也表明，那就是在乾隆时期，西方画风浪潮席卷，冲击到了当时的中国视觉艺术。确实，早在乾隆皇帝之前，雍正时期，就已经可以感觉到欧洲艺术的独特的影响力。在一些17世纪的中国绘画作品中，便可明显的看到欧洲风格的透视技法。一些瓷器的形状也是对一些欧洲银制品样式的复制，装饰品开始融入西方图案装饰的要素。(chinesenewsnet.com)

雍正皇帝（资料图片）
(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　而到了乾隆时期，欧洲艺术在中国的影响力从涓流变成了疾风暴雨。这就解释了为什么来自葡萄牙，意大利和法国的耶稣会传教士受到那样的欢迎。其中最著名者，当属意大利米兰出生的郎世宁。他27岁随葡萄牙使者们抵达北京。他不仅掌握了汉语，而且擅长书法和绘卷轴画，成为皇帝的宫廷画师。郎世宁1766年在北京逝世。其他的传教士，例如别名王致诚的法国传教士简•丹尼斯•阿提雷德（Jean Denis Attiret），也有类似的经历。这些人，都是记录乾隆远征胜利的绘画作者。他们的一些素描草图后来被送去法国雕刻。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　在建造清朝皇宫圆明园的过程中，西化鼎盛，达致顶峰。这个皇家园林是由耶稣会教士监造的，其灵感来自凡尔赛宫，精细地描述出中国的神奇幻境。颇具讽刺意味的是，这件具有西方风格的中国艺术品如今只能从印刷品上来欣赏了，它在1860年英法联军的劫掠中，被摧毁了。如今对暴行的愤怒继续回荡，每次被掠夺的圆明园青铜兽首的拍卖，都可以听到怒吼。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　不管是否有意或无意，西方艺术风格给中国艺术品带来的巨大变化是恰如其分的，从展览中的一件乾隆时代的花瓶上，可以看到它试图重现法国花瓶的形状。西式的花纹被塑成釉下彩的青瓷。这个花瓶可谓“自媚”的最突出的一个代表物，而它完全为博取美人欢心的功用又强化了这个法国式饰品的华而不实－它曾经是属于蓬巴杜夫人、路易十五的情妇的。(chinesenewsnet.com)

朗世宁画的乾隆戎装图（资料图片）
(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　而这种外来艺术风格－不仅仅是外国的主题，还有从根本上迥异于中国的审美观点对中国的影响，还从来没有被认真讨论过。(chinesenewsnet.com)

乾隆外族血统揭密西征行为(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　其中一个因素似乎是显而易见的。乾隆虽然生于中国，但他并不是中国人（汉人）。他作为17世纪中期建立皇朝的满族入侵者的后裔，这位皇帝穿满族服饰，对他的近亲说满语，有著满族人的胃口和风俗，喜爱狩猎。虽然他能用中文写一手好诗，书法也算过得去，但他实际上是穿行于不同文化传统间的旅行者。作为一个局外人，他只是以一种等同的好奇心态，来看待东西方文化形式和它们之间的冲突。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　麦理肯最后写道，甚至正是乾隆皇帝的这种外族血统，可以解释他对中亚土耳其斯坦的征服行为。因为传统的中国人受正宗儒家思想的影响，与入侵外国土地的行为是格格不入的。(chinesenewsnet.com)

　　乾隆继承了其祖先作为游牧民族驰骋于大草原的争斗习性和想领略克敌制胜的痛快，也许正是这种原因，导致他发动了几乎毫无政治意义的、令人奇怪的的远征。

关键字： 卢浮宫 版画 乾隆 朗世宁

http://www.dwnews.com/gb/MainNews/Forums/BackStage/2009_4_8_2_51_36_985.html

The Strange Tale of a Chinese Emperor’s French Prints
Sign In to E-Mail
Print
Single Page
ShareClose
LinkedinDiggFacebookMixxMy SpaceYahoo! BuzzPermalinkBy SOUREN MELIKIAN
Published: March 27, 2009
Of all the East-West encounters, few are as strange as the story at the heart of the Louvre show of 44 French 18th-century prints on view until May 18, under the title “The Chinese Emperor’s Battles: When the Qianlong Emperor Sent His Requests for Prints to Louis XV.”

Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image

Musée du Louvre/Martine Beck-Coppola
Works from a collection of Emperor Qianlong’s prints include an etching reworked with burin by Jean-Denis Attire.
From 1755 to 1759, the army sent by Emperor Qianlong (1735-1796) fought a tough war to conquer Mongol lands and, further west, the vast territories of the Uighurs in Turkistan, now called Xinjiang. Executed at the behest of the emperor, the prints offer an idealized vision of a considerably harsher reality.

There was no compelling economic or cultural reason for this taxing undertaking. In ancient times, the area was inhabited by a northeast Iranian people, the Sogdians, whose presence is established through material and textual evidence down to the seventh century A.D. The Uighurs, caught up in the westward movement of Turkic-speaking groups, gradually penetrated the area and within a couple of centuries made it their homeland for the next 1,100 years.

Adhering to Buddhism and occasionally to Christianity, the Uighurs were slowly won over to Islam by the missionaries who arrived from the Persian-speaking cities of Central Asia. None of this made their land a particularly obvious target for China.

Was the desire to repeat history an incentive? At the height of its maximum extension around the first or second century A.D., the Chinese empire ruled by the Han dynasty nominally controlled the area. Many centuries later, the Mongols overran Uighur lands in the course of their conquests, which embraced territories stretching from the borders of present-day Poland in the west to the Pacific shores of China and included the Middle East. But the great Song dynasty, under which Chinese culture rose to an apex around the 11th or 12th century, showed no interest in such undertakings. Neither did the Ming, who re-established Chinese unity after defeating the Mongol dynasty, who ruled China from 1279 to 1368.

So what drove the emperor of such an immense country as China to launch his armies across unforgiving deserts into lands where the material surroundings and the living culture bore no connection to his domain? And how on earth did the emperor of China come to commission French artists to make prints reproducing 16 paintings, also by Western artists, as a way of commemorating these conquests?

The Chinese imperial decree ordering the prints survives only in the French translation established in July 1765, which begins: “I want 16 sketches of the victorious battles won by me during the conquest of the Kingdom of Djungar and the surrounding Muslim countries that were depicted by Lang-Shi Ning,” the Chinese name adopted by the Jesuit Giuseppe Castiglione, “and the other European painters in my service to be dispatched to Europe where the best craftsmen will be selected to engrave them on brass plates.” Four sketches were to be sent forthwith and 100 impressions of each were first to be printed and sent to China together with the brass plates. The next 12 sketches would follow in separate batches.

Things did not go quite so smoothly. The Louvre curator in charge of the show, Pascal Torres, recounts in the exhibition book how the first batch — which left Canton, in Guangdong Province, on Jan. 21, 1766, and arrived in Paris with the text of the imperial edict on Aug. 10 — was held up by the East India Company until Dec. 17.

Mr. Torres speculates that the company dreaded the consequences of the emperor’s displeasure, should anything go amiss in the execution of the job. Word had reached the company managers that the decision to send the sketches to France had been made not by the emperor, but by subordinates in Guangdong. It was vital to get it right.

Work began in 1767 and lasted until 1774. Directed by the engraver Charles-Nicolas Cochin, the best masters of the genre executed etchings, and also made prints from the same brass plates reworked with a burin in order to achieve clearer outlines and greater contrast.

A very few extra sets were printed on top of those ordered by Qianlong. King Louis XVI, who mounted the throne in 1774, had one in his private quarters at Versailles. Others were given to ministers. One was acquired in the 20th century by Baron Edmond de Rothschild, who donated it to the Louvre in 1935.

As art, the prints amount to little more than anticipations of the kind of illustrations printed in late 19th-century children’s books. As an enigma of cultural history (altogether ignored in the exhibition book), you can’t beat them.

The sets bear no connection to Chinese art. Qianlong wrote poems about his victories, but these do not appear in the images as Chinese tradition would have it. Mr. Torres sees in the imperial commission an act of political “propaganda.” But aimed at whom? To be effective, propaganda images must deliver an instant punch. They should not look unfamiliar, let alone alien, as these French prints were bound to be perceived by the Far Eastern public, particularly the literati steeped in classical Chinese art and culture. Yet the print runs of the French impressions did not exceed 200.

The inevitable conclusion seems to be that the sets were commissioned for the private satisfaction of the emperor, presumably keen to remind his immediate entourage of his splendid achievements.

But why European prints? Granting that later Chinese editions of the sets included Chinese text (incomprehensibly, none are in the show), they remained stylistically far removed from the art that the Chinese might be expected to respond to with any measure of spontaneity.

This raises the broader issue of the wave of Westernizing fashion that engulfed the visual arts under Qianlong. True, under his predecessor, a distinct strain of European influence already made itself felt. Awareness of European-style perspective is perceptible in some 17th-century paintings. Porcelain shapes reproduce some European silver models and Western motifs creep into the decoration.

But the trickle of European influence became torrential under Qianlong. This explains why Jesuit missionaries from Portugal, Italy and France were welcomed. The most famous among them, the Milan-born Castiglione, arrived in Beijing at age 27, with the Portuguese mission. Having mastered not only the Chinese language, but also calligraphy and scroll painting, Castiglione became painter to the emperor and died in Beijing in 1766. Other Jesuits, like Jean-Denis Attiret, alias Wang Zhi Cheng, followed a similar course. These were the authors of the paintings celebrating Qianlong’s conquests in a Beijing palace, of which sketches were sent to be engraved in France.

The Westernizing fashion peaked in China with the construction of the Yuanmingyuan Palace, directed by the Jesuits, who drew their inspiration from Versailles while introducing fanciful Chinese details. Ironically, this piece of Western Chinoiserie for the Chinese — now known only through prints — was destroyed by the Anglo-French soldiery during the 1860 sack of Beijing. The outrage continues to reverberate each time one of the bronze animal figures believed to have been looted from the palace turns up at auction.

The havoc wrought on Chinese art by the Westernizing trend is aptly, if unintentionally, illustrated in the show by a Qianlong period vase, attempting to reproduce a French shape. Western-inspired floral motifs are molded under the celadon glaze. This is kitsch of the worst kind, enhanced by French ormolu fittings complete with a smiling mermaid — the vase once belonged to Madame de Pompadour, the mistress of Louis XV.

How the massive intrusion into China, not just of foreign motifs but of aesthetics fundamentally alien to her art, came to pass has never been seriously discussed.

One factor seems obvious. While born in China, Qianlong was not Chinese. A scion of the dynasty founded in the mid-17th century by the Manchu invaders, the emperor spoke Manchu to his close relatives, dressed like a Manchu and had the tastes of a Manchu prince, hunting included. Even though he was thoroughly at home in Chinese letters to the point of composing impeccable poems and producing passable calligraphy, Qianlong was a traveler through cultures. As an outsider, he looked at them and their conflicting art forms with equal curiosity.

The emperor’s foreign roots might even account for his conquering endeavor in Turkistan. Invading foreign lands is alien to the authentic Chinese tradition, molded by Confucianism, which does not hold the military in high esteem.

Ancient rivalries in the steppes and a taste for physical triumph inherited from his nomadic ancestry were perhaps the motivations behind Qianlong’s strange expedition that made so little political sense.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/28/arts/28iht-melik28.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

The Fifth Season :: Apr.08.2009 :: Uncategorized ::

Trackback URI | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed