In this stunning reassessment, Nicole T. C. Chiang argues that the famous Qianlong art collection is really ‘the collection of the imperial household in the Qianlong reign’. The distinction is significant because it strips away the modern, Eurocentric preconceptions that have led scholars to misconstrue the size of the collection, the role of nationalism in its formation, the distinction between art and artifact, and the actual involvement of the emperor in assembling the collection. No one interested in Chinese art will be able to ignore the ramifications of this important study.
Emperor Qianlong’s Hidden Treasures: Reconsidering the Collection of the Qing Imperial Household argues that the size of the collection was actually smaller than previously stated. Moreover, the idea that the collection put the whole of the empire on display (and thereby promoted political unity) does not square with the reality that most of the collection was hidden away. Instead, the collection was primarily for the emperor’s gaze alone. Chiang further explains that the collection was largely the product of work done by many specialists working at the Qianlong court, noting that the emperor often assumed a more supervisory role. Preliminary drawings, patterns, models, and prototypes of the items made in the imperial workshops also formed an important part of the collection, as they served to establish standardized models used to run the imperial household. The collection was thus both broader and narrower than previously stated.
1 有用 苦影 2022-02-07 16:04:04
对我个人来说,本书最重要的部分在于重审中国古代宫廷的“收藏”概念。作者认为,和西方文艺复兴以来基于“展呈”的收藏不同,中国宫廷的收藏重点在于“藏”(concealment),如此一来,过去常常将帝王收藏与“展示权威”对等起来的说法便值得商榷了。作者还强调,与其将宫廷收藏视为帝王个人收藏,不如称之为imperial collection,以此指明其集体性、机构性,这一观点也比伊佩霞等人的更准确。然而... 对我个人来说,本书最重要的部分在于重审中国古代宫廷的“收藏”概念。作者认为,和西方文艺复兴以来基于“展呈”的收藏不同,中国宫廷的收藏重点在于“藏”(concealment),如此一来,过去常常将帝王收藏与“展示权威”对等起来的说法便值得商榷了。作者还强调,与其将宫廷收藏视为帝王个人收藏,不如称之为imperial collection,以此指明其集体性、机构性,这一观点也比伊佩霞等人的更准确。然而,作者虽然厘清了方向与概念,却未能将其贯穿在具体的论点中——如果宫廷收藏依靠“藏”树立权威,那么它又何以成为第四章所说的、文人实证学术之材料?如果宫廷收藏是集体工作的成果,那它为何又反映出了乾隆个人的统治观和世界观?该书在宏观概念上给我带来较大启发,但具体到乾隆朝的收藏活动问题上,则仍存不少遗憾。 (展开)
0 有用 沉默之岛 2022-07-14 23:57:07
重新定义皇家“收藏”:藏起来的才是真正的收藏;前人研究忽视的样稿,具显示意义而非美学意义的藏品...但很多地方仍是欠缺思考的研究。
0 有用 Gillian 2020-08-09 12:24:08
作者用“清宮內務府藏品”取代“皇家藝術品收藏”將這些藏品放回18世紀的脈絡,力圖弱化乾隆個人品味,而著重展現內府藏品是一種制度活動。其中有乾隆內府收藏和歐洲皇家收藏的比較研究,開闊了橫向視角是挺好的,只是有些觀點覺得值得商榷。