塞尚的疑惑 03

In the same way, the contour of objects, conceived as a
line encircling the objects, belongs not to the visible world, but to geometry.

同理可知,物體的輪廓線若被構想成一條包圍著物體的實線,此線即顯然不屬於我們肉眼所見的世界,而屬於幾何學的世界。

雄伯
同样地,物体的轮廓,被构想作为环绕各个物体旋转的实线。各物体的轮廓并不属于可见的世界,而是属于几何学。

belongs 的主词是the contour of objects,而不是a line

If one outlines the contour of an apple with a continuous line, one
turns the contour into a thing, whereas the contour is rather the ideal
limit toward which the sides of the apple recede in depth. To outline no
contour would be to deprive the objects of their identity.

如果有人為一顆蘋果描出一條外形的連續線,他便製成了一個這種形狀的對象,但同時這條輪廓線也只是一條理想的界線,而讓這個蘋果的各個側面都失去了深度。更別提有哪一種形狀是不會奪走對象的正身(identity)的了。

雄伯
假如有人用一条连续的线描绘一颗蘋果的轮廓,他会将这个轮廓转变成为物体。另一方面,这个轮廓也是理想的限制,蘋果的各个侧面在深度方面,会朝这个限制消退。不画上任何轮廓,将是替各个物体剥夺它们的身份。

To outline just
one contour sacrifices depth—that is, the dimensions which give us the
thing, not as spread out before us, but as full of reserves and as an inexhaustible
reality.

只描出一條輪廓線,必然會犧牲了深度,換言之,事物所呈現的向度(dimension),並不是攤開了擺平在我們的面前,而是充滿了錯綜交雜、無可窮盡的現實(reality)。

That is why Cézanne follows the swelling of the object in
a colored modulation, and outlines several contours in blue lines. Referred
from one to the other, the gaze captures a contour that emerges from
among them all, just as it does in perception.

於是我們才明白,塞尚撙節調運色彩時,為何要隨順著對象的起伏而勾勒出許多條藍色的輪廓線。我們在這些線條間往返流連,然後在某一瞥中掌握了自這些線條中浮現而出的形狀,如同我們在知覺過程中所經歷的一樣。

雄伯
那就是为什么塞尚用彩色的调配,来遵循物体的膨胀,并且用蓝色的线条勾勒好几个轮廓。当眼光从一个轮廓转到另一个轮廓时,眼光捕捉从它们当中出现的一个轮廓,如同它在知觉中所为。

Nothing could be less arbitrary
than these famous distortions which, moreover, Cézanne abandoned
in his last period, after 1890, when he no longer filled his canvases with
colors and when he gave up the closely woven texture of his still lifes.

因此,我們無論如何都不能說這些翹曲乃塞尚任意獨斷之作,況且,塞尚在一八九○年以後--他的最後一個時期,放棄了這種有名的構圖法,同時,不再將畫布上滿顏料,也放棄了靜物的細密構織的畫法。

The drawing must therefore result from the colors, if one wants the
world to be rendered in its thickness.

因此,如果要呈現出世界的真實厚度,輪廓就必須由色彩來完成。

For the world is a mass without gaps,
an organism of colors across which the receding perspective, the contours,
the angles, and the curves are set up as lines of force; the spatial
frame is constituted by vibrating.

由於世界如同一個沒有區隔的團塊,一個色彩的系統,上面交錯鐫刻著隱藏的觀點、輪廓線、角度和曲線,當空間結構成形的時候,它本身會顫動。

“The drawing and the color are no
longer distinct. Gradually as you paint, you draw; the more the colors harmonize,
the more the drawing becomes precise. . . . When the color is at
its richest, the form is at its fullest.”

「輪廓和色彩彼此再也不相區分,只要我們去畫,輪廓之勾勒就在其中,而且,色彩愈諧調,輪廓就愈明確……當色彩的豐富性達到飽和時,形體就獲致了充實性。」

Cézanne does not try to use color to
suggest the tactile sensations which would give form and depth. These distinctions
between touch and sight are unknown in primordial perception.
It is only as a result of a science of the human body that we finally learn to
distinguish between our senses.

塞尚並不是想以色彩來提示觸覺,藉之強化形狀和深度,觸覺和視覺的這些區別,在始初的知覺中並沒有分別。我們之所以學會區分五官,只是由於人體科學的影響。

The lived object is not rediscovered or
constructed on the basis of the data of the senses; rather, it presents itself
to us from the start as the center from which the data radiate.

生活的對象並非以我們感官贊助為基礎,它其實從一開始就將自己呈現給我們,而感官的贊助是以它為中心才傳達出來的。

We see the
depth, the smoothness, the softness, the hardness of objects; Cézanne
even claimed that we see their odor.

我們看到對象的深度、平滑度、柔軟度和堅硬度,塞尚甚至認為我們看到對象的氣味。

If the painter wants to express the
world, the arrangement of his colors must bear within this arrangement
this indivisible Whole, or else his painting will only be an allusion to the
things and will not give them in the imperious unity, the presence, the insurpassable
fullness which is for us the definition of the real.

如果畫家要表達世界,他的色彩調度中必須帶有這不可分的整體,否則他的畫將只是在暗示事物,而未能給事物以緊密的統一、臨場、無以凌越的充實,也就是我們定義中的真實。

That is why
each brushstroke must satisfy an infinite number of conditions; that is why
Cézanne sometimes meditated for an hour before putting down a certain
stroke, for, as Bernard said, each stroke must “contain the air, the light,
the object, the composition, the character, the drawing, and the style.” Expressing
what exists is an endless task.

這就是為什麼每一筆觸都必須滿足無限的條件。塞尚有時在下手畫某一筆之前會左思右想好幾個小時,誠如勃納爾所言,是因為每一筆都必須「包含有空氣、光線、對象、構圖、形質、輪廓、和風格。」表達存在的事物是一件永無止境的工作。

Nor did Cézanne neglect the physiognomy of objects and faces: he
simply wanted to capture it emerging from the color.

塞尚也沒有忽視物體和臉孔的樣貌,他只是希望由色彩中掌握正在浮現的對象樣貌。

Painting a face “as
an object” is not to strip it of its “thought.” “I agree that the painter must
interpret it,” said Cézanne, “the painter is not an imbecile.”

把一張臉「當作物體」來畫,並不是要剝除它的「思想」,塞尚說:「我真正瞭解到畫家是在詮釋它」,「畫家並不是低能」。

But this interpretation
must not be a thought separated from vision. “If I paint all the
little blues and all the little browns, I make it gaze as he gazes.

這種詮釋不應是一種反省,而與看的動作有什麼不同。「如果我以密織的藍色和栗紅色來畫,我就能恰如其分地捉住他的一瞥。

雄伯
但是这种解释一定不要是跟视象分开的思想。「假如我画所有的细密蓝色与所有的细密粟红色,我会让视象凝视,如同他在凝视。

Who gives
a damn if they have any idea how one can sadden a mouth or make a cheek
smile by wedding a shaded green to a red.”

有些人對此很不以為然,他們覺得這無異於將暗綠色和紅色配對,來顯示一張悲傷的嘴或微笑的臉頰一樣的荒謬。」

雄伯
根本没有人在乎,即使他们知道画家是如何凭借将渐层的绿色跟红色搭配一块,才让嘴巴显出悲伤样子,或是让脸颊显出微笑样子。

The mind is seen and read in
the gazes, which are, however, only colored wholes. Other minds are given
to us only as incarnate, as belonging to faces and gestures.

人物的性格在他的一瞥眼神中被看見和把抓到,然而,這一瞥卻不過是色彩的組合。他人的心靈對我們而言只能以肉身來呈現,就好像其心靈寄寓在臉龐和表情姿態中。

雄伯
心灵在各种凝视里被看见与被阅读。可是这些凝视仅是彩色的整体。其他的心灵被给予我们,仅是作为一个化身,作为属于脸孔与姿态。

It serves no
purpose to oppose here the distinctions between the soul and the body,
thought and vision, since Cézanne returns to just that primordial experience
out of which these notions are pulled and which gives them to us as
inseparable.

由於塞尚回到了吾人的原初經驗,使得身體與靈魂、思想與視見間的矛盾和區分變得沒有必要,它們是一同來自於原本混同不分的原初經驗。

雄伯
在此将灵魂与身体,思想与视见之间的区别作为对立,并没有任何目的。因为塞尚回到仅是这些观念从那里被抽离出来的那种原初经验。那种原初经验将这些观念给予我们,作为是无法分开的经验。

The painter who thinks and seeks the expression first misses
the mystery—renewed every time we gaze at someone—of a person’s appearing
in nature.

那些尋求表現又將表現加以概念化的畫家,首先就錯失了一大奧祕--人出現於自然中,其表象在我們注視下無時無刻不在更新。

雄伯
思想而且寻求表达的画家,首先错过的就是人出现在自然中的这个奥秘。每当我们凝视某个人时,这个奥秘就在更新。

In The Wild Ass’s Skin Balzac describes a “tablecloth
white as a layer of fresh-fallen snow, upon which the place settings rose
symmetrically, crowned with blond rolls.”

巴爾札克(Balzac)在『憂鬱人生』(La Peau de chagrin)中描述,「桌布白得如同一層新雪,桌面上的擺設對稱地捲起,像鑲上了一些起伏縐摺。」塞尚說:

雄伯
巴尔扎克在「驴皮记」描述「一块桌巾洁白如新降的一层初雪,在桌巾上面,餐具均称地隆起,顶端摆放的是棕色的面包。」

“All through my youth,” said
Cézanne, “I wanted to paint that, that tablecloth of fresh-fallen snow. . . . Now I know that one must only want to paint ‘rose, symmetrically, the place settings’ and ‘blond rolls.’

“All through youth, ” said Cézanne, “I wanted to paint that, that tablecloth of new snow… Now I know that one must will only to paint the place-settings rising symmetrically and the blond rolls.

「整個青年時代,我盼望著能夠畫出那如新雪的桌布……現在我明瞭,我們只能夠盼望畫出那對稱地捲起桌面擺設和起伏縐摺。

雄伯
「在我整个青春时期,」巴尔扎克说,「我想要画出那个,那个洁白如新降的初雪的桌巾….现在我明瞭,一个人必须仅是意愿要绘画出那些餐具均称地隆起,以及那些棕色的面包。」

If I painted ‘crowned’ I’m done for, you
understand? But if I really balance and shade my place settings and rolls
as they are in nature, you can be sure the crowns, the snow and the whole
shebang will be there.”

如果我把「鑲嵌了的」感覺畫出來,我就算辦到了,你了解嗎?而如果我按照這些擺飾物和縐摺在自然中的狀態,加以平衡並畫出陰影,我保證你連那些鑲嵌、白雪和其他的刺激物都會呈現出來。」

If I paint
‘crowned’ I’ve had it, you understand? But if I really balance and shade my place settings and rolls as they are in nature, then you can be sure that the crowns, the snow, and all the excitement will be there too. ”

假如我画出「顶端放置」,那我就完蛋了,你们了解吗?但是假如我确实平衡并画出餐具与面包的阴影,如同它们在自然当中,你们能够确定,这些顶端,雪,与整个系统都会呈现出来。)

We live in the midst of man-made objects, among tools, in houses,
streets, cities, and most of the time we see them only through the human
actions which put them to use. We become used to thinking that all of
this exists necessarily and unshakably

我們生活在人造物的氛圍當中,在工具間、在房舍中、在街道、城市裡面,大多數時間,我們只將這些人造物置於人文活動的使用角度來看它們,我們變得慣於認定這種物的存在是必然而無可動搖的。

. Cézanne’s painting suspends these
habits and reveals the base of inhuman nature upon which man has installed
himself.

塞尚的繪事將這些思考習慣置於質疑中,而揭露了非人文性的自然,它是人類安身立命的基礎。

雄伯
塞尚的图画悬置这些习惯,并且揭露出人类置身其上的非人类的自然的基础。

This is why Cézanne’s people are strange, as if viewed by a
creature of another species. Nature itself is stripped of the attributes
which make it ready for animistic communions: there is no wind in the
landscape, no movement on the Lac d’Annecy, the frozen objects hesitate
as at the beginning of the world. It is an unfamiliar world in which one
is uncomfortable and which forbids all human effusiveness.

這也就是為何塞尚筆下的人顯得奇怪,好像是不同族群生物眼光下的產物;自然本身被剝卻了所有可用以聯結定形的屬性,地景裡沒有風,安西湖(Lac d’Annecy)面沒有任何波瀾,凝固的對象就如同在世界之始初般的猶豫不安。這樣一個不熟悉的世界,令人覺得不適,也禁止任何人文的情思。

雄伯

这就是为什么塞尚的人物显得怪异,好像是由非人类的生物在观看。自然本身被剥夺掉让它准备从事万物有灵的沟通的属性:风景里没有风,安西湖没有波动,冰冻的各种物体犹豫不安,好像在世界的开始。这样的熟悉的世界,人在里面感到不自在,并且让所有人性的情怀无法舒展。

Animism—the doctrine that all natural objects and the universe itself have souls 所有的自然的物体与宇宙本身具有灵魂的信念
Communion—The sharing of personal thoughts and feelings 个人的思想与感觉到分享沟通

If one looks at the work of other painters after seeing Cézanne’s paintings, one feels
somehow relaxed, just as conversations resumed after a period of mourning
mask the absolute change and restore to the survivors their solidity.

如果我們在看過了塞尚的畫之後,再去看其他畫家的作品,我們會感到大大的鬆了一口氣,就像是在遽變中隨之而來的悲傷退去,對話重新開始,生存者在對話中重拾其固存性。

雄伯
假如我们观看塞尚的图画之后,再观看其他的画家的作品,我们感觉相当地轻松。就像悼亡的时期过后,重新开始的对谈交流,用来掩饰绝对的生死无常,并且让依旧存活的家人恢复他们的凝聚团结。

But indeed only a human being is capable of such a vision, which penetrates
right to the root of things beneath constituted humanity. All indications
are that animals cannot gaze at [regarder] things, cannot penetrate
them in expectation of nothing but the truth.

但是,事實上只有人類才能運用這樣的觀點,穿透對事物的人文性編納秩序,而直達事物之根柢。所有的跡象顯示,動物無法注視事物,無法以僅為企求真相的方式來透視事物。

雄伯
但是,的确,仅有人类能够从事这样的视象。这样的视象直接贯穿到被形成的人性底下的各种物象的根柢。一切迹象显示,动物无法「凝视」物象,无法仅是企求真相地贯穿物象。

Gaze at (regarder)英译gaze at 用斜体字,又括弧附法文,强调「凝视」的意涵不仅是一般的注视或观看。而是,仅是企求真相地注视,才叫凝视。这是具有其他意图性的动物或人的眼睛无法做到的。

Émile Bernard’s statement
that a realistic painter is only an ape is therefore precisely the opposite of
the truth, and one sees how Cézanne was able to revive the classical definition
of art: man added to nature.

因此,勃納爾認為一個真正寫實的畫家必須像一隻猿猴,恰好是說到了真理的反面,而我們看到了塞尚如何以其才份恢復了藝術的古典定義:人類對自然的附言。

雄伯

勃纳尔说「写实的画家仅是人猿」,这句陈述跟真理恰恰背道而驰。我们看见塞尚是如何地复興艺术的古典定义:艺术是被增添到自然的人。
added to nature不是过去式,而是过去分词片语,修饰man,整句的定义是Art is man who is added to nature的省略。
庞蒂并不认同勃纳尔艺术模拟自然的「写实的画家仅是人猿」。庞蒂赞赏塞尚的「艺术是被增添到自然的人」。也就是,艺术家凭借艺术,融入自然,与永恒的自然同在,成为自然的部分。

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: