艺术为功利还是为政治–社区艺术可以自治吗？（下）

(这篇博文下部分于2011年1月8日发表在我的中国网易博客。)

（接上部分）

我的Facebook专题网页“Arts and the Community, and Fashion Statements“ （“艺术与社区，和時尚宣言”）登载的第一个消息是关于我在2010年4月发表的一篇介绍美国社区艺术历史的博文，所介绍的历史是根据我所阅读的美国“社区艺术网络”网上登载的文章摘要整理而成。由于面临财政困难，从2010年9月以来该全国性社区艺术网站已无法继续登载其所有文化内容，但已登载文章有被保存，并且在Facebook上设有一个网页供来访者留言交流。

我的这篇博文，“Interesting tidbit stories of the past century of arts in the community – from the Community Arts Network’s Reading Room”（“过去世纪里艺术在社区中的有意义小故事–从社区艺术网络的阅览室得来”），引用的第一篇文章是颇有名气的在美国纽约的艺术历史女学者琼·科恩-库鲁姿（Jan Cohen-Cruz）所写。在大学教学和发表文章书著外，琼·科恩-库鲁姿长期在纽约市内带领学生们建立了不少社区艺术项目，现在是设在纽约州雪城大学（Syracuse University）名为“Imagining America: Artists and Scholars in Public Life”（想象美国：公共生活中的艺术家和学者）的全国性文艺学术组织主任。该组织是1999年3月美国文艺学术界在密执安大学（University of Michigan）与克林顿总统的“白宫千年理事会”（White House Millennium Council）合作建立的，后在2001年迁移到雪城大学。

琼·科恩-库鲁姿的这篇文章是她专为介绍“社区艺术网络”网上阅览室里关于社区艺术与社会活跃行动的关系的内容部分而写，阐述道理并引用了不少社区艺术历史和现况的例子。文章题为“An Introduction to Community Art and Activism”（“社区艺术与行动主义的介绍”），在2002年2月发表。

琼·科恩-库鲁姿的文章说，社区艺术是指扎根于有共享感受的地方、传统或精神的艺术，因此并非所有社区艺术都有行动主义（也译活跃主义或激进主义）的目的；但即使是非活跃行动的社区艺术也有跟活跃行动相似的集体代表性；然而社区艺术与政治性艺术是有区别的，区别在于前者所关注更多的是社区民众的参与而非对现状的直接公开挑战：

“Community art is that which is rooted in a shared sense of place, tradition or spirit. Not all community art has an activist agenda; it is as likely to celebrate cultural traditions or provide a space for a community to reflect. But even such community art projects share activism’s commitment to collective, not strictly individual, representation. …

Community art can be distinguished from so-called political art, which usually refers to an aesthetic object whose subject matter either directly responds to a controversial public action or is intended to challenge public perception about the status quo. Think of great antiwar oeuvres by superb individual artists like Picasso‘s “Guernica” or Brecht’s “Mother Courage,” viewable in arts institutions (theaters, museums) and extolled for their universality and artistic virtuosity as much as for their message. In contrast, community-based art is as much about the process of involving people in the making of the work as the finished object itself. …”

在介绍美国社区艺术历史和社区艺术现况后，琼·科恩-库鲁姿的文章阐明了艺术与行动主义相交点的一些原理。文章指出，因为霸权型文化是轰烈而不完整的，所以反霸权在不同程度上是有机会的；民众有力量去改变社会的价值观念和态度，但要使改变能够发生民众必须组成各种不同的群体在经济利益和思想信仰等方面联系和合作；艺术并非一定要反映社会、经济和政治的重大现实，艺术可以帮助民众建立和提高群体性的、基层性的、由下而上的自我觉悟；历史并非一定是由社会阶级和知识精英在政治上从上到下创造的：

“Because hegemonic cultures are dynamic and incomplete, they are to various degrees open to counter-hegemonic alternatives. In fact, many people have power and shape the values and attitudes of a society. Art need not merely reflect large social, political and economic realities. But to bring about change, people must form blocs that, according to Gramsci, are heterogenous and loosely aligned through ideological belief as well as economic self-interest. This contrasts sharply with the position that social classes and an elite cadre of intellectuals are the makers of history. Art can help create the consciousness that motivates people to form such blocs.

Art can put people in touch with their desire. Activism within a grassroots, i.e. bottom-up, framework valorizes what the community wants, as opposed to a top-down approach that any political entity, right or left, could use. Art has the capacity for reflection and exploration of what one individual or group wants.”

在讨论上面道理时，琼·科恩-库鲁姿特别提到了已故著名的西方马克思主义思潮理论家、德国裔美国哲学家赫伯特·马尔库塞（Herbert Marcuse）的观点。

赫伯特·马尔库塞观察到主流的文化和文明社会总带有压迫性或压抑性，而艺术审美的想像力可以非直接的与其对抗，因此他不赞同传统马克思主义谴责小资产阶级艺术的做法。赫伯特·马尔库塞认为，想像力可以创建新的观念或者将原有思想重新构造从而不被主流意识形态所征服，而艺术最好发挥的作用是作为自由想象的空间在其中使人生失去或隐藏的创意性、精神性和直观性的能力重新发挥出来：

“Theoretical support for this position has been convincingly articulated by philosopher Herbert Marcuse, who spoke to the subversive potential of the imagination, with its ability to not be colonized by prevailing ideology, to generate new ideas and to reconfigure the familiar.

… However, Marcuse saw the aesthetic dimension as offering an indirect route. This he contrasted with Marxist utilitarianism, which condemned the bourgeois and celebrated proletarian art. Seeing civilization as repressive, Marcuse argued that art serves best as an imaginative space for freedom to regenerate the lost, hidden, creative, spiritual and intuitive capacities of human life. Art is subversive because it reminds people of what has been buried.“

比传统马克思主义宽容的赫伯特·马尔库塞对艺术审美提出了两个条件，一是艺术有责任帮助社会应对其隐藏存在的矛盾和冲突，二是艺术作品必须包含希望、必须体现人的本领去想象不存在的东西并将它塑造出来：

“There are nevertheless two conditions within Marcuse’s concept of aesthetic dimension: 1) Art has a responsibility to help society deal with its hidden conflicts and contradictions; 2) The work must embody hope, the human ability to imagine what doesn’t exist and give it shape.”

在解释赫伯特·马尔库塞的艺术审美观点时，琼·科恩-库鲁姿更指出，艺术开拓的空间是用于想象和批判性思维而不是用于剥夺人的权利，因此艺术对行动主义起平衡作用，因为即使是用意最好的行动主义也总带有吩咐人民怎么想和怎么做的倾向：

“Art can open a space for critical thinking. By its definition, art is a nonproscriptive space, an “imagine if,” not an “accept this or else.” As such, it offers a built-in antidote for even the most well-meaning activism’s tendency to tell people what to think and do.”

琼·科恩-库鲁姿的文章还引用了长期辅导带领美国洛杉矶无家可归群体进行文艺表演的艺术导演约翰·马尔皮德（John Malpede）的很有哲理性的话，“生活比艺术更重要，而正是这点使得艺术如此重要”（“Life is more important than art. That’s what makes art so important.”）。