Chinese painting emphasizes the overall nature of the picture, the integration of the subject and the scenery, and at the same time, it possesses both authenticity and artistic conception.
教学团队
课程特色
视频(28)
考试(25)
文档(3)
讨论(3)
最新学员
2. Your idea on the difference between Chinese traditional painting and western landscape painting.
Some western scholars argue, based on the apparent formal differences between Chinese and Western landscape paintings, first that the Chinese have the idea of“heaven and man merging into one”( tian ren heyi 天人合一), man is not separated from nature and Chinese landscape thus represents pure nature with no human figures in the center"; second, "Western landscape tends to be more realistic than its Chinese counterpart". How do you agree with these two points? Do they seem reasonable to you? What do they see? What do they overlook?
49 回复
-
-
-
-
-
The characters in Chinese landscape painting are not "dispensable", but form a "subject-object" relationship with the landscape through size, position, and dynamic design
The "unreality" of Chinese landscape painting is precisely the core of its artistic value - it abandons the superficial "image" but reaches a deeper "truth".
-
-
These points are partially reasonable as they correctly identify the philosophical ideal of harmony in Chinese art and the Western pursuit of perceptual verisimilitude, but they overlook the fact that Chinese landscapes often contain tiny, yet central, human figures to signify the conscious mind within nature, and they mistakenly equate Western perspective with realism, ignoring its constructed idealism and the profound conceptual abstraction in Chinese ink-wash techniques.
-
-
-
-
-
-
I do not vote for the first point，because it's the Chinese that paint and complete these works so that human is naturally involved in the pictures even though they have no apparent form of expression like draw human figures out. And for the second one, there is no doubt that western pictures commonly are filled with more realistic colors and shapes without some kind of internal and obscure imagism or consensus reaching by Chinese and only can be understood by Chinese.
-
1. On "tian ren heyi" & no central humans: Reasonable (Chinese paintings use nature for harmony, e.g., Travelers Among Mountains and Streams), but overlooks hidden human traces (pavilions)—man is "in nature", not absent.
2. On "Western realism": Partly reasonable (uses perspective/light, e.g., Rembrandt), but ignores Chinese "expressive realism" (brushwork conveys essence, e.g., Ni Zan)—a different authenticity.
3. Summary: Scholars see formal differences but miss cultural cores—Chinese "man merges into nature" vs. Western "man observes nature", with distinct "authenticity" definitions.
-
-
-
-
These observations identify surface contrasts but are reductive. On the first point, the tiny human figure in Chinese painting does reflect harmony with nature, but it is not "pure nature"—the landscape is a cultivated mental construct, expressing the artist's spirit and philosophy. The human subject is central in intent, not scale. On "realism," Western art excels in optical illusion, while Chinese art pursues essential realism—capturing the inner vitality and principle of nature, not its momentary appearance. Thus, Western art depicts nature as seen by the eye; Chinese art expresses nature as understood by the mind. Both are deeply symbolic, prioritizing different kinds of truth.
添加回复
您确定给 “0” 位老师发送协议吗？
UMOOCS用户服务协议
问题分类：
--
