塞尚的疑惑 02

It is thanks to the impressionists, and particularly to Pissarro, that Cézanne later conceived painting not as the incarnation of imagined scenes, the projection of dreams outward, but as the exact study of appearances:
less a work of the studio than a working from nature.

由於受到印象派畫家--特別是畢沙羅 (Pissarro) 的影響,塞尚後來認為繪畫並不是想像場景的具象化、或夢幻外顯的結果,而應是表象的精細研究,繪事不僅止於畫室,更應該根據自然。

He quickly parted ways with the impressionists, however. Impressionism
was trying to capture, in the painting, the very way in which objects
strike our eyes and attack our senses. They are therefore almost always executed in broad strokes and
present the moral physiognomy of the actions rather than their visible aspect.

然而,他很快就與印象派畫家分道揚鑣。印象派試圖以繪畫捕捉物體為肉眼乍見和敲擊感官時的特定方式,物體被描繪為它們呈現給瞬間知覺時的表象,它沒有固鎖的輪廓線,而是由光線和空氣使之成形。

Impressionism represented
them in the atmosphere through which instantaneous perception gives
them to us, without absolute contours, bound together by light and air.

To capture this envelope of light, one had to exclude siennas, ochres, and
black and use only the seven colors of the spectrum.

為了掌握此一光線的氛圍,畫者必須放棄赭色、黃土色及黑色,只使用光譜的七色。

In order to represent
the color of objects, it was not enough to put their local tone on the canvas,
that is, the color they take on isolated from their surroundings; one
also had to pay attention to the phenomena of contrast which modify local
colors in nature.

而且,不是僅將物體的各區色調塗上畫布為算了事,換言之,對象的色調不能孤立於其周遭環境之外,還必須注意自然中色區互補的對比現象。

Furthermore, by a sort of reversal, every color we see
in nature elicits the vision of its complement; and these complementaries
heighten one another.

進一步說,我們在自然中所知覺的每一種色彩均會誘發其補充性表象,而這些互補的表象又彼此增強對方的顯現。

To achieve sunlit colors in a picture which will be
seen in the dim light of apartments, not only must there be a green—if
you are painting grass—but also the complementary red which will make
it vibrate.

想在一幅畫中得到草地為陽光所照射的色彩,又明知這幅畫會掛在房裡微弱的燈光下展示,你就不能僅僅使用綠色,還必須補出紅色,才會使那片草地顫動起來。

Finally, the impressionists break down the local tone itself. One
can generally obtain any color by juxtaposing rather than mixing the colors
which make it up, thereby achieving a more vibrant tone.

最後,印象派畫家打破了區域色調本身,畫家可以將細部的色彩並列,而不再將它們混合起來,藉著並列,廣泛的保留所有的色彩,並獲致更具顫動效果的色調。

The result
of these procedures was that the canvas—which no longer corresponded
point by point to nature—restored a general truth of the impression
through the action of the separate parts upon one another.

經過這些程序的處理,畫布上所呈現的--當然已不再是與自然的一一對應--是各個細部的交疊互動而形成的普遍真實的印象。

But at the same
time, depicting the atmosphere and breaking up the tones submerged
the object and caused it to lose its proper weight.
但在同時,舖陳氛圍和打碎色調的方式卻也淹沒了對象,使對象失去了應有的重量。

The composition of
Cézanne’s palette leads one to suppose that he had another aim. Instead
of the seven colors of the spectrum, one finds eighteen colors—six reds,
five yellows, three blues, three greens, and one black.

不過,塞尚調色盤上的配置會讓人認為他與印象派畫家的目標有所不同。他不是用光譜上的七色,而是十八色--六紅、五黃、三藍、三綠及黑。

The use of warm colors
and black shows that Cézanne wants to represent the object, to find it
again behind the atmosphere.

暖色系和黑色的使用顯示了塞尚希望描寫對象,希望在氛圍之外重新挖掘出對象。

Likewise, he does not break up the tone;
rather, he replaces this technique with graduated mixtures, with a progression
of chromatic nuances across the object, with a modulation of colors
which stays close to the object’s form and to the light it receives.

另外,他也未將色調瓦解為細小的筆觸,而寧以漸進色取代這個技巧,以色彩的微小差異漸進地佈施於對象,將色彩調整到接近對象的外觀和它所受的光。

The suppression
of exact contours in certain cases and giving color priority over
the outline obviously do not have the same sense in Cézanne and in impressionism.

某些狀況下,他更乾脆撤除明確的輪廓線,讓色彩較線條更具優位--對塞尚和印象派畫家而言,這個分歧點即意味著他們之間的差異。

The object is no longer covered by reflections and lost in
its relationships to the air and to other objects: it seems subtly illuminated
from within, light emanates from it, and the result is an impression of solidity
and material substance.

對象不再為折射的光所覆蓋,而失去它與氛圍和與其他對象之間的關連,它似乎微微地由內部發光,光線由它的內部發散出來,因而形成一種固著狀態和物質實體的印象。

雄伯
對象不再為折射的光所覆蓋,不再迷失于氛圍和與其他對象關連中。对象似乎微微地由內部發光,光線由它的內部發散出來,因而形成一種固著狀態和物質實體的印象。
lost 在此是过去分词,与前面的covered 对等,no longer covered and lost

Moreover, Cézanne does not give up making
the warm colors vibrate, but achieves this chromatic sensation through
the use of blue.

再者,塞尚並未放棄製造暖色系的震顫效果,但卻改用藍色來獲致這種上色的效果。

One must therefore say that Cézanne wished to return to the object
without abandoning the impressionist aesthetic which takes nature as its
model.

如果說印象派畫家的美學是將自然當作他們的模特兒,則我們必須接續上文的論證,說塞尚是企圖回到對象本身而並不放棄印象派的美學。

Émile Bernard reminded him that, for the classical artists, painting
demanded outline, composition, and distribution of light.

勃納爾曾提醒塞尚,對於古典的藝術家來說,繪畫要求的是輪廓、構圖和光線的分佈。

Cézanne
replied: “They created pictures; we are attempting a piece of nature.”

塞尚回答道:「不錯,他們創作的是一幅幅的圖畫,而我們追求的則是一幅幅的自然。」

He
said of the old masters that they “replaced reality with imagination and by
the abstraction which accompanies it.” Of nature, he said, “the artist must
conform to this perfect work of art.

提到那些古典大師時,他說他們「以想像力和伴隨而生的抽象化取代了真實。」論及自然時,他說:「藝術家必須順從這件完美的藝術品。

Everything comes to us from nature;
we exist through it; let us forget everything else.” He stated that he wanted
to turn impressionism into “something solid, like the art in the museums.”
所有的事物均是透過自然來到我們的面前;我們仰賴自然而存在:除自然之外,再也沒有什麼值得記憶了。」他說他希望使印象主義變得「更堅實,就像那些博物館中的藝術一樣。」

His painting would be a paradox: investigate reality without departing
from sensations, with no other guide than the immediate impression of
nature, without following the contours, with no outline to enclose the
color, with no perspectival or pictorial composition.

他的繪畫是很弔詭的:既想追求真實,又不放棄感官的外貌;而除了取法來自自然的直接印象外,別無索引;不循輪廓線作畫,不用輪廓線框限住色彩,也不採視點或構圖上的安排。

This is what Bernard
called Cézanne’s suicide: aiming for reality while denying himself the
means to attain it.

勃納爾認為塞尚這樣做無異是自殺:追求真實卻自絕於通向真實之技道。

This is the reason for his difficulties and for the distortions
one finds in his pictures between 1870 and 1890. Cups and saucers
on a table seen from the side should be elliptical, but Cézanne paints the
two ends of the ellipse swollen and expanded.

塞尚陷入困惑的理由就在這裡。而在他一八七○到九○年間作品中所呈現的那股扭曲不安,理由亦在此。桌子上的茶杯和杯托,由側邊看過去應該是橢圓的,但塞尚把這個橢圓的兩端畫得臃腫膨大。

The work table in his portrait
of Gustave Geffroy stretches, contrary to the laws of perspective, into
the lower part of the picture.

在古斯塔夫‧喬弗瑞(Gustave Geoffrey)的肖像畫中,那張工作檯拉得非常長,直伸向此畫的底部,這顯然違反了視點法則。

By departing from the outline, Cézanne
would be handing himself over to the chaos of the sensations. Now, the
sensations would capsize the objects and constantly suggest illusions—for
example, the illusion we have when we move our heads that objects themselves
are moving—if our judgment did not constantly set these appearances straight.
由於放棄了輪廓線,塞尚使自己陷溺於感覺的混沌之中,這種混沌常常會干擾對象而引生出幻覺--譬如,若我們搖晃自己的腦袋,這時所見的對象好像自己正在搖動一樣--除非我們已在判斷中認定了表象本是直挺不動的。

According to Bernard, Cézanne engulfed “the painting in
ignorance and his mind in shadows.”

照勃納爾的說法,塞尚「將他的畫埋沒在無知裡,將他的心埋沒在陰影中。」

In fact, one can judge his painting in this way only by letting half of
what he said drop away and only by closing one’s eyes to what he painted.

作是,若要這樣子來評斷塞尚,只能說評斷者對塞尚的話只聽了一半、對塞尚的畫也只看了一半。

It is clear from his conversations with Émile Bernard that Cézanne
was always seeking to avoid the ready-made alternatives suggested to him:
the senses versus intelligence; the painter who sees versus the painter who
thinks; nature versus composition; primitivism versus tradition.

在跟勃納爾的對話中,塞尚總是刻意避開任何對方所提出的現成選項,如:感覺相對於判斷;看的畫家相對於思考的畫家;自然相對於構圖;素人畫家相對於傳統學院畫家。

“We have
to develop an optics,” Cézanne said, “by which I mean a logical vision—
that is, one with nothing absurd.”

塞尚說:「我們必須發展一種光學,這種光學即是我所謂的邏輯的視覺--換言之,這種視覺中全然沒有荒謬的成份。」

“Are you speaking of our nature?” asked
Bernard. Cézanne: “It has to do with both.” “But aren’t nature and art different?”

勃納爾問:「你這不是在說我們所面對的自然嗎?」塞尚說:「這種光學兩者都要處理。」「然而自然和藝術不是完全不同的兩回事嗎?」

“I want to unite them. Art is a personal apperception. I place this
apperception in the sensations and I ask intelligence to organize them
into a work.”1

「我就是希望把它們弄成一回事。藝術是個人的親身感受,這些感受在感覺中具現出來,並在我的知性要求下組織成一幅畫。」

But even these formulas put too much emphasis on the ordinary
notions of “sensibility” or “sensations” and “intelligence”—which
is why Cézanne could not persuade and this is why he liked to paint better.

但即使是這些敘述,也過度強調了「感受性」、「感覺」和「知性」這些普通的理念,這也就是為什麼塞尚寧願去畫,而不能信賴自己的論證有什麼說服力。

Rather than apply to his work dichotomies, which moreover belong
more to the scholarly traditions than to the founders—philosophers or
painters—of these traditions, we would do better to let ourselves be persuaded
to the proper sense of his painting, which is to challenge those dichotomies.

他也不喜歡讓自己的作品受二分法的擺佈,說是較接近保存傳統的作風,或較接近推動傳統的作風。他所致力的是繪畫的真正意義,因而必須經常地質疑傳統。

Cézanne did not think he had to choose between sensation
and thought, as if he were deciding between chaos and order. He did not
want to separate the stable things which appear before our gaze and their
fleeting way of appearing.

塞尚並不認為他必須在感情與思想間抉擇,在秩序與混沌間取捨;他也不想將我們眼見的靜物和它們顯現的變化樣態割裂開來。

He wanted to paint matter as it takes on form,
the birth of order through spontaneous organization. He makes a basic
distinction not between “the senses” and “intelligence” but rather between
the spontaneous order of perceived things and the human order of
ideas and sciences.
他希望將事物描畫得如其外觀所呈現的樣貌,在自發性的組織中引生出秩序來。他做了一個基本的區別,但並不是「感性」、「知性」之類的分別,而是區分出我們知覺中事物的自發組合,和依賴觀念、科學所做出的人為的組合。

We perceive things; we agree about them; we are anchored
in them; and it is with “nature” as our base that we construct the
sciences.

我們看到事物;我們與它們交融;我們停泊於它們之中;而我們建構的各門科學乃以此「自然」為根基的。

Cézanne wanted to paint this primordial world, and this is why
his pictures give us the impression of nature at its origin, while photographs
of the same landscapes suggest man’s works, conveniences, and
imminent presence.

塞尚想要畫出這個原初世界(primordial world),他的畫似乎因此將自然表現得素淨純粹,相對於同樣的風景照片來看,照片本身提示了人工、便捷而急迫的呈現。

Cézanne never wished to “paint like a savage.” He
wanted to put intelligence, ideas, sciences, perspective, and tradition back
in touch with the world of nature which they were intended to comprehend.
He wished, as he said, to confront the sciences with the nature
“from which they came.”

這並不是說塞尚曾想要「像一個野人般作畫」。他只是想把智巧、觀念、科學、視點和傳統都放回與自然世界保持接觸的狀態裡去,在此狀態中,它們必須融合為一個整體。如同他所說的,他希望將各門科學帶到「它們所從出的」自然面前。

By remaining faithful to the phenomena in his investigations of perspective,
Cézanne discovered what recent psychologists have come to formulate:
the lived perspective, that of our perception, is not a geometric
or photographic one.

由於塞尚一直忠實於現象本身,在他對視點的探究中,他發現了晚近心理學家所發掘出來的--生活的視點(lived perspective)。這是我們日常知覺的真正狀態,它不同於幾何式和攝影式的視點。

In perception, the objects that are near appear
smaller, those far away larger, than they do in a photograph, as we see in
the cinema when an approaching train gets bigger much faster than a
real train would under the same circumstances.

一張照片裡面的物體,若與我們實際去看相比較,我們會發現,照片近處的物體在實地看時變得比較小,而照片遠方的物體在實地看時則顯得比較大。(電影裡面也有類似情形:在相同條件下,一列火車由遠方駛近,在影片中變大的速度比實地上火車變大的速度要快得多。)

To say that a circle seen
obliquely is seen as an ellipse is to substitute for our actual perception the
schema of what we would have to see if we were cameras. In fact, we see a
form which oscillates around the ellipse without being an ellipse.

因此,如果說斜看一平面圓形即是看到一橢圓,就等於以相機來取代我們實際的知覺,因為,我們實際所見的形狀,乃似橢圓而非橢圓的未決形狀。

雄伯

假如我们说,倾斜角度观看的圆形,被作为椭圆形来观看,那等于是,我们的实际的知觉被这种基模所取代,假如我们是照相机,我们必然会看见的东西这样的基模。实际上,我们看见一个形式环绕椭园形摇摆,但是它并不是椭园形。

In a portrait of Mme Cézanne, the border of the wallpaper on one side of her
body does not form a straight line with that on the other: and indeed it is
known that if a line passes beneath a wide strip of paper, the two visible
segments appear dislocated.

在一幅塞尚夫人的肖像中,夫人身體兩側的壁紙邊緣並未形成一直線,而事實上,眾所皆知,一直線若通過一條不透明寬紙帶底下,則其兩段可見的分節會顯得脫了臼。

雄伯
在一幅塞尚夫人的肖像中,夫人身體的一侧的壁纸的边缘,跟身体的另一侧的边缘,并没有形成一条直线。的确,众所周知,假如一条线从一条宽长的纸底下通过,两个看得见的片段看起来像是脱臼分开。

Gustave Geffroy’s table stretches into the bottom
of the picture, and indeed, when our eye runs over a large surface,
the images it successively receives are taken from different points of view,
and the whole surface is warped.

古斯塔夫‧喬弗瑞的桌子伸進圖畫的底部,而事實上,當我們透視一大塊面的時候,我們所連續接收到的意象,並不是以同一視點構成的,因而整個塊面會翹曲起來。

雄伯
古斯塔夫‧喬弗瑞的桌子伸進圖畫的底部。的确,當我們的眼睛览视一大塊表面时,我們眼睛連續接收到的各种意象,从许多不同的观点获得,因而整個塊面會翹曲起來。

It is true that I freeze these distortions
in repainting them on the canvas; I stop the spontaneous movement in
which they pile up in perception and tend toward the geometric perspective.

因此,我將這些翹曲凝塑於畫布之繪事中並未偏離真實,我等於是中止了一個自發的運動。這些翹曲在知覺中進行此項運動而漸漸累積,進而形成一幾何學的視點。

雄伯
的确,当我将这些意象重新绘画在画布时,我凝冻了这些翘曲。我中止这个自动自发的运动,在运动中
这些翘曲在知觉中堆积起来,并且倾向于几何学的透视法。

This is also what happens with colors. Pink upon gray paper colors
the background green.

同樣的事亦發生在色彩中。把玫瑰紅色塗在灰紙上,當作綠色的背景。

雄伯
Colors 在此是动词,作「改变颜色」解释,而非名词「颜色」,
同樣的事亦發生在色彩中。将粉红色加在灰色之上,会将背景改变成为绿色/

Academic painting shows the background as gray,
assuming that the picture will produce the same effect of contrast as the
real object.

學院派的繪畫會把背景仍當作灰色,而假定畫面可產生現實事物中的相同對比效果。

雄伯
學院派的繪畫则是显示背景作为灰色,因为它们假定,畫面可產生跟現實事物相同的對照的效果。

Impressionist painting uses green in the background in order
to achieve a contrast as brilliant as that of objects in nature. Doesn’t this
falsify the color relationship?

印象派繪畫則將此狀態的背景當作綠色,以便獲得如同事物處於自然中一般的鮮明對比效果。
。然而,如此一來,不是曲解了色彩的關係嗎?
雄伯
印象派的绘画则是使用绿色当背景,为了获得鲜明的对照,如同客体在自然界的的鲜明对照。这难道不是会让颜色的关系变成不真实?

It would if it stopped there, but the painter’s
task is to modify all the other colors in the picture so that they take away
from the green background its characteristics of a real color.

若僅停留在上述的層次,好像是很有問題,但畫家的工作乃是調整畫面中所有的其他顏色,以便讓它們由這般的綠色背景中獲得自己顏色的真實特性。

雄伯
假如它仅是停在那里,那将会颜色的关系成为不真实。但是画家的工作就是要修改图画中的所有的其他颜色,这样它们才能够从绿色的背景,拿走掉绿色作为真实颜色的特征。

Similarly, it is Cézanne’s genius that when the overall composition of the picture is
seen globally, perspectival distortions are no longer visible in their own
right but rather contribute, as they do in natural vision, to the impression
of an emerging order, an object in the act of appearing, organizing itself
before our eyes.

同樣的,塞尚的才份在於,當整個構圖看起來是圓球狀時,視點的翹曲本身會隱而不現,如同它們在日常視覺中的運作,甚至它能夠幫助我們對浮現中的秩序產生印象,也能夠幫助對象在我們眼前進行表象和形構自身的活動。

雄伯
同樣的,塞尚的才份在於,當图画的整個構圖从球形角度观看时,視點的翹曲本身不再看得见。相反地,如同它們在日常視象中的運作,它们促成这个印象:在我们的眼前,有个正在浮现的秩序,一个客体正在出现当中,组织它自己。

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: