在纷繁复杂的世界中，语言如同清泉，洗去心灵的尘埃。本书以“清醒之语，洞察人心”为主题，旨在探讨简洁透明的语句艺术。让我们一同踏上这场语言与心灵的探索之旅。

In the complex and intricate world, language is like a clear spring, washing away the dust of the soul. This book, with the theme of "Clear Words, Insight into the Heart," aims to explore the art of concise and transparent language. Let us embark on this journey of exploration into language and the soul together.

1. 知性思维之于文艺本质问题的认识，一个突出的缺陷是在凸现文艺的某个方面的特性的同时，看不到文艺存在的多方面性以及文艺本质的多方面性。以我国当代文艺理论的发展为例，上世纪80年代中期以后，当艺术的审美特性被文艺界广为关注从而引发文艺本质问题的重新认识和讨论时，有的同志坚持文艺的意识形态属性，而完全否定文艺还有一些“超意识形态”或“非意识形态”的存在成分；相反，有的同志看到了文艺存在某些“超意识形态”或“非意识形态”的因素，却又以此来非难、否定文艺的意识形态性。有的同志只看到文艺的一般意识形态属性或文艺与其他意识形态形式的共同性，看不到文艺的特殊性、审美性；而有的同志又只是片面地讲文艺的特殊性、审美性，却有意无意地忽略甚至反对文艺的意识形态一般性，将文艺的审美属性与意识形态性相互隔裂开来乃至对立起来。此外，还有的同志把文艺的审美属性与文艺的认识属性、生产属性等等对立起来，甚至还把文艺的意识形态属性与文艺的认识属性、生产属性对立起来。如此等等的思维取向，实际上正是恩格斯在《反杜林论》和《自然辩证法》等著作中所批评的那种形而上学的思维方式。

1. A prominent defect in the intellectual understanding of the essential issues of literature and art is that, while highlighting the characteristics of a certain aspect of literature and art, it fails to recognize the multifaceted nature of literature and art, as well as the multifaceted nature of their essence. Taking the development of contemporary Chinese literary and artistic theories as an example, after the mid-1980s, when the aesthetic characteristics of art were widely concerned in the literary and artistic circles, leading to a re-understanding and discussion of the essential issues of literature and art, some comrades insisted on the ideological nature of literature and art, completely denying the existence of certain "trans-ideological" or "non-ideological" components of literature and art; conversely, some comrades recognized certain "trans-ideological" or "non-ideological" factors in the existence of literature and art, but used them to criticize and deny the ideological nature of literature and art. Some comrades only see the general ideological attributes of literature and art or the commonality between literature and art and other ideological forms, but fail to see the particularity and aesthetic nature of literature and art; while some comrades only片面ly talk about the particularity and aesthetic nature of literature and art, but deliberately or inadvertently ignore or even oppose the general ideological nature of literature and art, separating and even opposing the aesthetic attributes of literature and art with their ideological nature. In addition, there are some comrades who oppose the aesthetic attributes of literature and art with their cognitive attributes, productive attributes, etc., and even oppose the ideological attributes of literature and art with their cognitive attributes and productive attributes. Such thinking orientations are actually the metaphysical way of thinking criticized by Engels in works such as "Anti-Dühring" and "Dialectics of Nature."

2. “成为一个出色的人，并非要成为他人，只需做好自己，做到极致便足矣。”

2. "To become an outstanding person, it is not necessary to become someone else; simply do your own best, and that is enough."

3. 可见，正是艺术发展的客观状况，是区分艺术与非艺术的客观需求，是艺术问题在美学中的核心地位，决定了艺术定义的必要性和它在美学研究中的重要性。这里还应该补充一个同样也是很重要的理由，即一门学科的基本价值所在就在于对研究对象的性质作出科学的合乎实际的说明，美学、文艺学也不例外。不对文艺的本质问题有一个认识，就很难对其它问题作出有成效的说明。我们承认文艺活动是人类掌握现实的一种特殊精神活动，承认艺术品不同于人类实践活动中的其它人工制品，那就应该对这种活动及其创造物的特殊性做出说明。而要做出这样的说明，普遍性的抽象和抽象概念的使用就是不可缺少的，通过寻找艺术的共同性质而为之下定义的方法正是这种抽象概括的常见方式之一。

3. It is evident that it is the objective condition of the development of art, the objective demand for distinguishing art from non-art, and the core position of art issues in aesthetics that determine the necessity of the definition of art and its importance in aesthetic research. An equally important reason should also be added here, that the fundamental value of a discipline lies in the scientific and realistic explanation of the nature of its research object, and aesthetics and literary studies are no exception. Without a recognition of the essential nature of literature and art, it is difficult to provide effective explanations of other issues. We acknowledge that literary and artistic activities are a special form of spiritual activity through which humans master reality, and that artworks are different from other artificial products in human practice. Therefore, an explanation should be made of the particularity of this activity and its creations. To make such an explanation, the use of universal abstraction and abstract concepts is indispensable, and the method of defining art by seeking its common properties is one of the common ways of this abstract generalization.

4. 尽管分析美学完全否定为艺术下定义的方法是不可取的，但该派对传统的思辨美学的驳难也有助于提醒我们充分注意艺术定义上的困难，注意文艺本质问题的复杂性。

4. Although it is entirely unhelpful to completely deny the method of defining art, the critique of the traditional speculative aesthetics by this school also helps to remind us to pay full attention to the difficulties in the definition of art and to the complexity of the essential issue of literature and art.

5. 在分析美学家看来，通过寻找适用于一切艺术品的共同性质的方法来为艺术下定义，会导致两个错误：一是对艺术品作出过于简单化的解释；二是为艺术品下一个极模糊的定义，使我们根本无法用它来理解艺术品这一概念。哲学家维廉·肯尼克在《传统美学是否基于一个错误》(

5. In the view of aesthetic analysts, defining art by seeking common properties applicable to all works of art leads to two errors: one is the oversimplification of the interpretation of works of art; the other is providing an extremely vague definition of art, which makes it impossible to understand the concept of art with it. The philosopher Wilhelm Wundt discusses this in his work "Is Traditional Aesthetics Based on a Mistake"?

6. “满心期许必有所失，人无贪欲便有恩赐。”

6. "Expecting too much will result in disappointment, and those without greed will receive blessings."

7. 即使在马克思主义美学和文艺理论研究内部，对文艺本质的认识也并非从来一致的。自上世纪20年代至今，在“意识形态论”之外，还先后产生了种种不同的观点，其中在不同时期具有广泛影响、甚或一度成为主流学说的就有“认识（反映）本性论”、“审美本质论”和“艺术生产论”等。这些新论或者是在承认意识形态论对文艺的本质特征具有普遍涵盖性的前提下提出来的，或者是在认为意识形态论只是对文艺本性的局部概括的基础上提出来的；有的是想纠意识形态论之偏颇，也有的是欲补意识形态论之不足。由此便形成了意识形态论与其他各论之间有时相互交叉或交融，有时又相互对峙与纷争的局面。这种局面，一方面为马克思主义文艺学开辟了一个富于张力的理论探索空间，各种论说从不同层面、不同角度切入并深化了对文艺本性的认识，显示出马克思主义文艺学的内在活力；但另一方面当某一种学说成为一个时期的主导观点和主流学说之后，又往往会对其他的认识角度和观点形成遮蔽，从而窄化并模糊了人们对文艺本性应有的正确而全面的理解。有鉴于此，今天我们极有必要对文艺的意识形态论与其他各论之间的关系作出辩证的思考、分析与综合，以求得对文艺本性的合理解释，从而把马克思主义文艺学的建设推向一个新的高度。马克思主义文艺学建设总体格局的发展和学术水平的提高，有赖于这类基础性研究工作的实质进展。

7. Even within the field of Marxist aesthetics and the study of literary and artistic theory, the understanding of the essence of literature and art has never been uniform. Since the 1920s to the present day, besides "ideological theory," a variety of different viewpoints have emerged one after another. Among them, those that have had a wide influence in different periods and even once became mainstream theories include "epistemological (reflective) nature theory," "aesthetic nature theory," and "art production theory." These new theories were either proposed on the premise of acknowledging the universal coverage of ideological theory over the essential characteristics of literature and art, or on the basis of the belief that ideological theory is only a partial summary of the nature of literature and art. Some aim to correct the bias of ideological theory, while others seek to fill the gaps. As a result, there has been a situation where ideological theory and other theories sometimes intersect or blend, and sometimes confront each other and engage in disputes. On the one hand, this situation has opened up a theoretically rich and dynamic exploration space for Marxist literary and artistic studies, with various theories cutting in from different levels and perspectives to deepen the understanding of the essence of literature and art, demonstrating the inherent vitality of Marxist literary and artistic studies. On the other hand, when a certain theory becomes the dominant view and mainstream theory of a period, it often obscures other perspectives and viewpoints, thereby narrowing and blurring the correct and comprehensive understanding of the nature of literature and art that people should have. In light of this, it is of great necessity today for us to engage in dialectical thinking, analysis, and synthesis of the relationship between the ideological theory of literature and art and other theories, in order to achieve a reasonable explanation of the nature of literature and art, and thus promote the construction of Marxist literary and artistic studies to a new height. The development of the overall pattern of the construction of Marxist literary and artistic studies and the improvement of academic standards depend on the substantial progress of such fundamental research work.

8. 《心理》第67卷)这篇文章中，认为传统美学至少基于两个错误；一个错误是假设艺术有一种共同的性质；一个错误是假设批评必须以美学理论为基础，即认为如果没有适用于一切艺术品的标准和规范，就不可能有值得信赖的批评。关于第一个错误，肯尼克用贝尔的理论在现实实践中可能遭遇的尴尬作为说明问题的例子。他说可以设想有一个盛满了各种东西(其中也包括各种艺术品)的巨大货品仓库，如果我们让某个人到这个大仓库中把其中的艺术品挑选出来，虽然这个人从来也不知道艺术品的共同性质是什么，也不知道什么令人满意的艺术定义，但他却肯定会毫不费力地从中把艺术品挑选出来。但假若你让他到仓库里去把所有“有意味的形式”或所有具有“表现性”的事物挑选出来，这时他就会茫然不知所措，不知道怎么办了。所以要从所有艺术品中寻找共同点的努力是注定要失败的。另一位分析美学家莫里斯·韦兹也干脆明了地指出：“艺术，……并没有一系列必要和充分的特质，因此任何一种艺术的理论在逻辑上都是不可能的。”莫里斯·韦兹：《美学问题》，纽约1970年版，第170页。因此之故，分析美学否定传统的思辨美学的“本质主义的偏见”，转而把艺术哲学的任务调整为对艺术概念的逻辑分析和澄清，使美学研究从“探询美的本性”一变而成为“分析出现在美学讨论中的概念”。

In the article from Volume 67 of "Psychology," it is argued that traditional aesthetics is at least based on two errors; one error is the assumption that art has a common nature; another error is the assumption that criticism must be based on aesthetic theory, that is, the belief that without standards and norms applicable to all works of art, it is impossible to have trustworthy criticism. Regarding the first error, Kenick uses Bell's theory as an example of the embarrassment that may be encountered in practical reality. He says that it can be imagined that there is a vast warehouse filled with various items (including various works of art), and if we let someone go to this large warehouse to pick out the works of art, although this person has never known what the common nature of works of art is, nor has he known what constitutes a satisfactory definition of art, he will still be able to pick out the works of art effortlessly. However, if you ask him to go to the warehouse to pick out all "significant forms" or all things with "expressiveness," at this point he will be at a loss, not knowing what to do. Therefore, the effort to find commonalities among all works of art is doomed to fail. Another analytical aesthete, Morris Weitz, also points out straightforwardly: "Art, ... does not have a set of necessary and sufficient traits, therefore, any theory of art is logically impossible." Morris Weitz: "Aesthetic Problems," New York, 1970, p. 170. Therefore, analytical aesthetics rejects the "essentialist bias" of traditional speculative aesthetics and adjusts the task of art philosophy to logical analysis and clarification of the concept of art, making aesthetic research shift from "inquiry into the nature of beauty" to "analysis of the concepts that appear in aesthetic discussions."

9. “本质论”派的艺术研究思路，在现代美学的发展进程中也不断受到怀疑和质疑，尤其是遭遇到分析哲学与美学的强有力的冲击。分析美学家根据维特根斯坦关于各种不同的游戏仅有“家族相似”而无共同规则和特征的看法，否认在各种不同的艺术品中能够找到一种共同的性质。

9. The artistic research approach of the "essentialism" school has continuously been questioned and suspected in the development process of modern aesthetics, especially when it encountered the strong impact of analytical philosophy and aesthetics. Analytical aestheticians, based on Wittgenstein's view that different games only have "family resemblances" without common rules and characteristics, deny the possibility of finding a common nature in various different artworks.

10. 在现代辩证思维产生之前，人类的思维一般都囿于知性思维的局限，而不能达到对于认识对象的整体的、综合的辩证思维高度，因而在文艺本质的认识上自然也就造成了种种片面乃至偏颇。就西方历史上对文艺本质的探索而言，古代模仿论的文艺本质观着重的是文艺与客体关系的研究，把文艺的内容看成是对客观的自然世界和社会生活的真实模仿。近代表现论的文艺本质观着重的是文艺与主体关系的研究，把文艺的本质视为艺术活动主体的审美情感和艺术想象的外射或自我表现；而西方现代作品本体论的文艺本质观则割裂作品与客体世界和主体世界的有机联系，把文艺作品视为自足自立的整体，从文艺作品自身中寻求文艺的自主特性。这些历史上依次出现的文艺本质观应该说都抓住了文艺本质的某个方面的性能，有其合理价值，但从文艺活动现象的整体存在角度来看，又都具有各自的片面性和局限性，有以偏概全之弊。时至今日，尽管历经德国古典哲学的唯心辩证法和马克思主义唯物辩证法的浸润，辩证思维已成为人类认识现实的最有力的思维工具。但由于各种主客观条件的限制，在认识活动中，包括在文艺本质的研究中，形而上学的知性思维依然广有市场，难以祛除；在西方当代的文艺理论中，对文艺本质的认识也还是林林总总，五花八门。因此，对艺术本质问题上的这种复杂性和困难性，我们一定要保持清醒的认识。企图在艺术本质研究和艺术定义问题上一蹴而就，毕其功于一役，一劳永逸地求得一个完满的结论，是幼稚的，显然高估了自己个人的心智，同时也小看了问题的困难性。

10. Before the emergence of modern dialectical thinking, human thought was generally confined to the limitations of rational thinking, and could not reach the comprehensive and dialectical level of understanding the object of cognition as a whole. Therefore, in the understanding of the essence of art, various one-sidedness and bias naturally arose. In terms of the exploration of the essence of art in Western history, the ancient theory of imitation focused on the study of the relationship between art and the object, viewing the content of art as a true imitation of the objective natural world and social life. The modern theory of expression focused on the study of the relationship between art and the subject, considering the essence of art as the projection or self-expression of the aesthetic emotions and artistic imagination of the subject of artistic activity; while the modern theory of work ontology in the West severed the organic connection between the work and the objective world and the subjective world, viewing the work of art as a self-sufficient and independent whole, and seeking the autonomous characteristics of art from the work of art itself. These successive theories of the essence of art in history should be said to have grasped some aspects of the properties of the essence of art, with their own rational value. However, from the perspective of the overall existence of the phenomenon of artistic activity, they all have their own one-sidedness and limitations, and have the flaw of seeing the whole from the part. Up to now, although infiltrated by the idealistic dialectic of German classical philosophy and the materialist dialectic of Marxism, dialectical thinking has become the most powerful thinking tool for human understanding of reality. However, due to various subjective and objective conditions, in the process of cognition, including the study of the essence of art, metaphysical rational thinking is still widespread and difficult to eliminate; in contemporary Western art theory, the understanding of the essence of art is still diverse and varied. Therefore, we must maintain a clear awareness of this complexity and difficulty in the problem of the essence of art. Attempting to achieve a complete conclusion in one fell swoop in the study of the essence of art and the problem of artistic definition, and seeking a lasting solution, is naive, obviously overestimating one's own intellectual abilities, and also underestimating the difficulty of the problem.

11. “春种秋获不同道，旭日皓月终异途。”

11. "Planting in spring and harvesting in autumn, dawn and bright moon take different paths."

12. 艺术定义问题为什么会成为美学研究的一个主要问题呢现任《英国美学杂志》主编P·拉马克近来给出了他的回答。他说：“整个20世纪，美学的主要精力都集中在为艺术下定义，而且这样做有着充分而明确的道理。这部分地是由于19世纪末以来，现代主义艺术和非再现的艺术在生长壮大；部分地是由于这些新艺术的开创者如此热衷于发表关于艺术的宣言，而这些宣言之间又充满了各种对立和冲突；或许是由于艺术的边界的确是不确定的。”他又说：“虽然20世纪晚期的美学出现了某种(早些年有所预感的)退避倾向，但人们还是深切地感到需要有一个标志来区分艺术和非艺术，需要了解这个标志的意义；在面对彻底放弃这一切的企图时，感到艺术这个观念还是值得被保留下来的。这里一个明显的动机就在于人们有一种相当牢固的看法，即艺术是美学的核心。……因此一个很有意义的推论是，无论艺术是什么，起码根据美学哲学家的看法，它的问题将肯定会留存给21世纪的。”参见P·拉马克《〈英国美学杂志〉40年》，章建刚译，载《哲学译丛》(京)2001年第2、3期。

12. Why has the question of defining art become a major issue in aesthetic research? The current editor of the "British Journal of Aesthetics," P. Lamarque, recently provided his answer. He said, "Throughout the 20th century, the main focus of aesthetics has been on defining art, and there is ample and clear reason for this. Partly because since the end of the 19th century, modernist art and non-representational art have grown and become strong; partly because the founders of these new arts were so enthusiastic about issuing declarations on art, and these declarations were filled with various contradictions and conflicts; perhaps because the boundaries of art are indeed uncertain." He added, "Although there was a tendency towards retreat in late 20th-century aesthetics (which was foreseen earlier), people still deeply felt the need for a sign to distinguish between art and non-art, and to understand the meaning of this sign; in the face of attempts to abandon everything completely, the idea of art itself is still worth preserving. One obvious motivation lies in the fact that people have a rather firm view that art is the core of aesthetics.... Therefore, a meaningful inference is that no matter what art is, at least according to the views of aesthetic philosophers, its problems will certainly remain for the 21st century." See P. Lamarque, "40 Years of the British Journal of Aesthetics," translated by Zhang Jiagang, in "Philosophical Translations" (Beijing), Issue 2-3, 2001.

13. “钟表能够回归原点，但已不再是往昔。”

13. "The clock can return to its starting point, but it is no longer the same as before."

14. 分析美学注意到了不同门类的艺术进行分类和定义上的困难，同时对传统美学长期存在的空谈艺术本质而相对忽视艺术的开放性、变易性，忽视具体艺术审美经验的描述与分析提出了有针对性的批评，是有其一定道理与合理之处的。但该派美学的偏颇也是显而易见的。正如美国学者曼德尔鲍姆所批评的，分析美学既然用家族相似来解释游戏和艺术，那就应该承认一个家族的成员有共同的祖先和血缘关系，从而以遗传学上看就可能具有像遗传因素的共同属性，而分析美学却没有对此可能性进行深入探讨，并否认家族成员具有共同的本质，这在理论上是难以成立的。尤其是维特根斯坦的后继者们流入纯粹语义分析的把戏，不仅消解了传统的思辨性哲学美学及其所关注的美的本质、艺术的本质等美学核心问题，而且也忽略或者说切断了美和艺术与人类生活、人的命运的关联，这就使美学研究放弃了对价值、意义等重大问题的深层追问，使美学研究远离了美学问题，从而在某种程度上也就消解了美学本身。分析美学名为美学，却又“并不涉及美学本身的问题”参见P·拉马克《〈英国美学杂志〉40年》，章建刚译，载《哲学译丛》(京)2001年第2、3期。，这就是分析美学的问题所在，也是分析美学后来终于衰落下去的原因所在。

14. Analytic aesthetics has recognized the difficulties in classifying and defining different genres of art, and has made targeted criticisms of the traditional aesthetics that have long been engaged in empty talk about the essence of art while relatively neglecting the openness and variability of art, and the description and analysis of specific aesthetic experiences. There is a certain degree of reason and rationality in this. However, the bias of this school of aesthetics is also evident. As the American scholar Mandelbaum criticizes, since analytic aesthetics uses the concept of family resemblance to explain games and art, it should acknowledge that members of a family share a common ancestor and kinship, and thus may possess common hereditary traits. However, analytic aesthetics has not deeply explored this possibility and has denied that family members have a common essence, which is difficult to establish theoretically. Especially the followers of Wittgenstein, who have drifted into the trick of pure semantic analysis, have not only dissolved the traditional speculative philosophical aesthetics and its focus on the essence of beauty and art, but have also ignored or cut off the connection between beauty and art with human life and the destiny of individuals. This has led aesthetic research to abandon deep inquiry into major issues such as value and meaning, and has distanced aesthetic research from aesthetic issues, thus to some extent dissolving the essence of aesthetics itself. Analytic aesthetics, in name, is about aesthetics, but "does not involve the problems of aesthetics itself" (see P. Ramak's "40 Years of the British Journal of Aesthetics," translated by Zhang Jiagang, in "Philosophical Translation Series" (Beijing) 2001, No. 2, 3). This is where the problem of analytic aesthetics lies, and also the reason why it eventually declined.

15. 美国美学家帕克虽不同意贝尔对艺术性质的概括，却完成赞成并沿袭了贝尔解决这一问题的思路。他在1939年发表于《世界哲学杂志》上的《艺术的本质》一文中指出，所有的艺术哲学，无不具有一个共同的假设，那便是认为各种艺术无论在形式或内容上可以有多大的差异，它们之间仍旧不乏共同的性质，正是这种共同的性质确立了艺术与非艺术的分野。帕克不赞成用“有意味的形式”、“表现”、“直觉”、“客观化的情感”之类提法概括和描述艺术的共同性质，认为这类简单的定义一是不足以真正区分艺术与非艺术，二是往往忽略了艺术之其它的重要方面，是必要的但非充足的。他自己是用想象中产生的满足、社会的意义以及和谐的形式三种特性来界定艺术共有的本质。

15. Although the American aesthete, Parker, did not agree with Bell's summary of the nature of art, he did complete and continue the line of thought that Bell used to address this issue. In his article "The Nature of Art," published in the journal "World Philosophy" in 1939, Parker pointed out that all art philosophies share a common assumption, which is that despite the great differences in form and content among various arts, they still possess common characteristics. It is this common nature that establishes the distinction between art and non-art. Parker did not approve of using terms like "significant form," "expression," "intuition," and "objectified emotion" to summarize and describe the common nature of art, considering such simple definitions to be insufficient to truly differentiate between art and non-art. He also believed that they often overlook other important aspects of art, which are necessary but not sufficient. Parker himself defined the common essence of art using three characteristics: satisfaction generated by imagination, social significance, and harmonious form.

16. 像贝尔和帕克这类美学家，在西方被称之为艺术研究中的“本质论者”。尽管他们并不都认同同一种本质，对艺术所下的定义也各不相同，但在相信艺术有共同的性质并可以下定义这一点上却是共同的。

16. Aestheticians like Bell and Parker, in the West, are known as "essentialists" in the study of art. Although they do not all agree on the same essence and their definitions of art vary, they share the belief that art has common properties and can be defined.

17. 形而上学的思维方式对对象的认识取“非此即彼”的态度，在绝对不相容的对立中思维，坚信“是就是，不是就不是；除此之外，都是鬼话”，而看不到事物的对立面可以在一定条件下相互联系、相互转化，从而成为“亦此亦彼”的存在。其实，如果承认文艺现实是有着多方面联系的，并且具有历史变易性的现象，而文艺本质也是一个多层次多侧面的综合系统，用联系和发展的观点，用系统思维、综合思维的方法来审视文艺本质问题，那么如上所述的各种文艺本质论研究就有可能不再以“片面的深刻”的理论姿态呈现，而会在一个新的综合系统中消除了各自的“片面”性同时保留其“深刻”性，从而获得各自不同的理论定位，构成人们对文艺本质某个层面或侧面的认识。

17. The metaphysical way of thinking takes an "either/or" attitude towards the understanding of objects, thinking in absolute incompatible opposites, and firmly believes that "it is if it is, it is not if it is not; everything else is nonsense," without seeing that the opposites of things can be interconnected and transformed under certain conditions, thus becoming "both/and" entities. In fact, if we acknowledge that the reality of literature and art is a phenomenon with multifaceted connections and historical variability, and that the essence of literature and art is also a comprehensive system with multiple levels and aspects, and if we examine the essence of literature and art from the perspective of connection and development, using systematic and comprehensive thinking methods, then the various studies on the essence of literature and art as mentioned above may no longer appear in the theoretical posture of "one-sided profundity." Instead, they may be integrated into a new comprehensive system that eliminates their respective "one-sidedness" while retaining their "depth," thus obtaining different theoretical positions and constituting people's understanding of the essence of literature and art at some level or aspect.

18. 文艺本质是人类对文艺现象的精神属性的抽象。而文艺现象是人类所特有的一种极其丰富多样、变化多姿的文化创造现象，它与人类的物质生产与精神生产有着千丝万缕的复杂联系，它随着人类历史生活的发展与科学技术的进步而不断更新与丰富，同时它也在人类的社会文化生活中发挥着综合多样的功能。正是基于文艺现象的这样一些复杂特点，再加上文艺研究主体总是要受到客观的现实条件和历史需求以及主观的社会与审美理想等方面条件的制约和限制，因而人类对文艺本质的认识也总是显示出其多样性与复杂性。诚如胡有清同志所言：“文学本质理论的多样性是和文学现象的复杂性、文学发展的历史性、文学功能的综合性联系在一起的。同时，又是受人类认识水平的渐进性、主体条件的差异性、主体把握过程中不可避免的片面性等因素决定的。”胡有清：《文艺学论纲》，南京大学出版社1992年版，第31页。狄其骢先生也曾从另外的思路指出过：“文艺本质论和文艺一样，也是一种复杂的社会文化现象，是整个文艺现象的有机组成部分。每种文艺本质论，都是在一定的社会文化背景中产生的，它是理论、材料和需要相互汇合的产物，它以一定的哲学的、社会的、审美的理论为指导，以一定历史阶段的文艺现实情况和特色为依据，并要自觉或不自觉地适应某种社会利益和审美需求。文艺本质论是出自对文艺实践的理解，但一旦产生就会转变为实践力量，对文艺本质的不同的理解，形成不同的文艺观，指导不同的艺术流派，创作出不同的文艺作品，并且在艺术世界的相互影响、汇合、积淀中，历史地形成具有时代和民族特色的文艺传统和文艺理论传统。每种文艺本质论不仅有一定的艺术依据，而且有其艺术结果，甚至有资格渗入艺术文化的传统中去。”狄其骢：《文艺学问题》，山东大学出版社1993年版，第2页。因此，历史上出现的各种文艺本质论，虽然存在着这样那样的缺陷甚至谬误，但由于都有一定的文艺实践、理论观念和审美要求为依据，从而其各自的见解都可能具有一定的合理性，都可能触及到文艺本质的某个方面，反映出人类对文艺本质的精神探索历程。从这个意义上讲，人类对文艺本质的认识不可能是固定单一的、直线发展的，而会是复杂多样的、曲折反复的。

18. The essence of literature and art is the abstraction of the spiritual attributes of the literary and artistic phenomena. The phenomena of literature and art are a type of extremely rich and diverse, ever-changing cultural creation unique to humans, which has intricate and complex connections with human material and spiritual production. It continuously updates and enriches itself with the development of human historical life and the advancement of science and technology, while also playing a comprehensive and varied role in human social and cultural life. It is precisely because of these complex characteristics of the phenomena of literature and art, coupled with the constraints and limitations that the subject of literary and artistic research always faces from objective realistic conditions, historical demands, and subjective social and aesthetic ideals, that the understanding of the essence of literature and art by humans always shows its diversity and complexity. As Comrade Hu Youqing said: "The diversity of literary essence theory is linked to the complexity of literary phenomena, the historical nature of literary development, and the comprehensive nature of literary functions. At the same time, it is determined by the gradualness of human cognitive levels, the differences in subjective conditions, and the inevitable one-sidedness in the process of subjective grasp." Hu Youqing, "Outline of Literary Studies," Nanjing University Press, 1992, p. 31. Mr. Di Qicong also pointed out from another perspective: "Like literature and art, the theory of the essence of literature and art is also a complex social and cultural phenomenon, an organic part of the entire phenomenon of literature and art. Each theory of the essence of literature and art arises in a certain social and cultural context and is the product of the convergence of theory, materials, and needs. It is guided by certain philosophical, social, and aesthetic theories, based on the literary and artistic realities and characteristics of a certain historical stage, and must consciously or unconsciously adapt to certain social interests and aesthetic needs. The theory of the essence of literature and art originates from the understanding of literary and artistic practice, but once produced, it will transform into a practical force. Different understandings of the essence of literature and art lead to different views of literature and art, guide different artistic schools, create different literary and artistic works, and, through the mutual influence, convergence, and accumulation in the artistic world, historically form literary and artistic traditions and theoretical traditions with characteristics of the times and the nation. Each theory of the essence of literature and art not only has certain artistic foundations but also has artistic outcomes, and even has the资格 to渗透 into the tradition of artistic culture." Di Qicong, "Problems in Literary Studies," Shandong University Press, 1993, p. 2. Therefore, the various theories of the essence of literature and art that have emerged in history, although they have such and such defects and even errors, are all based on certain literary and artistic practices, theoretical concepts, and aesthetic requirements, and thus their respective views may have a certain rationality, may touch on some aspect of the essence of literature and art, and reflect the spiritual exploration process of humans towards the essence of literature and art. In this sense, the understanding of the essence of literature and art by humans is not possible to be fixed and single, but will be complex and diverse, tortuous and反复.

19. “成年人最优的自我约束便是适时停止损失，人皆有执着，但不可，顽固不化。”

19. "The best self-discipline for an adult is to stop the loss at the right time. Everyone has attachment, but one should not be stubborn and inflexible."

20. 通观数千年来的历史，人类智性能力的发展变化是巨大的，科学技术取得了令人震惊的进步。然而，在另一些方面，比如在审美和艺术的领域，包括美学和文艺学的研究，我们却不敢说有睥睨古人的资格。古希腊的艺术迄今仍是高不可及的范本。在美学和文艺学研究上，我们所思考的那些基本理论问题仍然没有超出柏拉图和亚理士多德所思考的范围，而且也不敢说已取得了比他们更深刻的洞见。柏拉图曾以“美是难的”来概括他对美本质问题的探索历程，今天如果我们谦逊一点的话，恐怕还是要说像美的本质、艺术的本质这样的问题，的确是难于探讨的，难于定论的。就此而言，美和艺术还是一个有待索解的谜。

20. Throughout thousands of years of history, the development and changes in human intellectual ability have been immense, and science and technology have made astonishing progress. However, in other aspects, such as the fields of aesthetics and art, including the study of aesthetics and literary studies, we dare not claim to have the资格 to look down upon the ancients. The art of ancient Greece remains an unattainable exemplar. In the study of aesthetics and literary studies, the fundamental theoretical issues we ponder have not exceeded the scope thought by Plato and Aristotle, and we dare not say that we have gained deeper insights than they. Plato once summarized his exploration of the essence of beauty with the phrase "beauty is difficult." If we are modest today, it is probably still true to say that questions like the essence of beauty and the essence of art are indeed difficult to explore and difficult to definitively conclude. In this regard, beauty and art are still a mystery waiting to be unraveled.

21. “大喜大悲能看清自身，大起大落能看清友人。”

21. "Great joy and great sorrow can reveal oneself, and great ups and downs can reveal one's friends."

22. “人生犹如蒲公英，看似自在却不由己心。”

22. "Life is like a dandelion, seemingly carefree but not controlled by one's own heart."

23. “璀璨的时刻众人皆有，莫将一时视作永恒。”

23. "There are brilliant moments for everyone, do not take a fleeting moment as eternal."

24. “毫无底线的迎合与迁就，只会令自己置身于浓雾之中，连自身都难以认清。”

24. "Unlimited迎合和迁就只会让自己陷入浓雾之中，连自己都难以认清。"

25. 美国美学家H·C·布洛克在其《艺术哲学》中说过：“什么是艺术品回答这一问题，实际等于为‘艺术品’下一个定义，而要得出这样一个定义，最有效和最有利的途径是首先追问所有艺术品的共同性质是什么。”见《艺术哲学》中译本《美学新解》，滕守尧译，辽宁人民出版社1987年版，第285页。的确，在西方美学和文艺学史上，大多数美学家、文艺学家就是这样做的，他们坚信文艺具有自己的共同本质，并试图对这种共同本质做出一劳永逸的阐明。仅以现代美学为例，英国美学家克莱夫·贝尔就认为一种有说服力的美学应该对艺术共同具有的基本性质作出恰如其分的阐述，正是这种基本性质将艺术品与其它一切物品区别开来。他说：“要么承认一切视觉艺术品中没有某种共性，要么只能在谈到‘艺术品’时含糊其辞。当人们说到‘艺术品’时，总要以心理上的分类来区分‘艺术品’与其它物品。那么这种分类法的正当理由是什么呢同一类别的艺术品，其共同的而又是独特的性质又是什么呢不论这种性质是什么，无疑它常常是与艺术品的其它性质相关的；而其它性质都是偶然存在的，唯独这个性质才是艺术品最基本的性质。艺术品中必定存在着某种特性：离开它，艺术品就不能作为艺术品而存在；有了它，任何作品至少不会一点价值也没有。”克莱夫·贝尔：《艺术》，周金环，马钟元译，中国文艺联合出版公司1984年版，第4页。贝尔认为，艺术品作为能够唤起人的审美感情的对象，其具有的共同性质就是“有意味的形式”。

25. The American aesthete H.C. Brookes once said in his book "Aesthetics of Art": "To answer the question 'What is art?' is actually equivalent to defining 'artwork.' And to come up with such a definition, the most effective and advantageous approach is to first inquire about the common characteristics of all artworks." See the Chinese translation of "Aesthetics of Art" as "New Interpretation of Aesthetics," translated by Teng Shouyao, published by Liaoning People's Publishing House in 1987, page 285. Indeed, in the history of Western aesthetics and literary studies, most aestheticians and literary scholars have done just that. They firmly believe that literature and art have their own common essence and try to elucidate this common essence once and for all. Taking modern aesthetics as an example, the British aesthete Clive Bell believed that a persuasive aesthetics should adequately articulate the basic characteristics that are commonly possessed by art, which is what distinguishes artworks from all other items. He said: "Either acknowledge that there is no commonality among all visual artworks, or be vague when talking about 'artworks.' When people talk about 'artworks,' they always distinguish them from other items through psychological categorization. What is the justification for this method of classification? What are the common and unique characteristics of artworks in the same category? No matter what these characteristics are, undoubtedly they are often related to other characteristics of artworks; while other characteristics are accidental, this one is the most basic characteristic of artworks. There must be some characteristics in artworks: without them, artworks cannot exist as artworks; with them, any work will at least have some value." Clive Bell: "Art," translated by Zhou Jinhuan and Ma Zhongyuan, published by China Literature and Art Press in 1984, page 4. Bell believes that as objects that can evoke human aesthetic feelings, the common characteristics of artworks are "significant forms."

26. 英、美尤其是英国是分析哲学从而也是分析美学的大本营。分析美学在英、美曾经很是火了一阵子，并使上世纪70年代的美学经历了向分析哲学的转向。但自上世纪70年代末至今的二十多年里，该派美学却遭遇到了强劲的反弹。一个突出的标志就是，艺术定义问题不仅没有被分析美学消解掉，反而仍被美学家们视为美学和艺术研究的中心问题。阿诺德·伯兰在《英国美学杂志》1986年春季号的一篇文章中写道：“直到最近，对许多英美国家的艺术哲学家而言，艺术的定义始终是他们全神贯注的问题”。“新近对艺术的讨论，从一般的理论探讨到艺术的定义，艺术与非艺术的区分标准等等，除了一些偶然因素外，一个共同的特征就是要对艺术进行本质特征的研究。”阿诺德·伯兰：《美学史》，载《英国美学杂志》，1986年春季号。转引自朱狄《当代西方艺术哲学》，人民出版社1994年版，第77—78页。

26. Britain and the United States, especially Britain, have been the strongholds of analytic philosophy, and consequently, analytic aesthetics. Analytic aesthetics was once very popular in Britain and the United States and caused aesthetics in the 1970s to undergo a shift towards analytic philosophy. However, over the past twenty-odd years since the late 1970s, this school of aesthetics has encountered a strong backlash. A prominent sign of this is that the issue of the definition of art has not been dissolved by analytic aesthetics but is still regarded by aestheticians as the central issue in the study of aesthetics and art. Arnold Berleant wrote in an article in the Spring 1986 issue of the "British Journal of Aesthetics": "Until recently, for many art philosophers in Britain and the United States, the definition of art has always been their primary concern." "The recent discussions on art, from general theoretical discussions to the definition of art, the criteria for distinguishing art from non-art, and so on, have a common feature, which is to study the essential characteristics of art." Arnold Berleant: "The History of Aesthetics," in "British Journal of Aesthetics," Spring 1986. Quoted from Zhu Di's "Contemporary Western Art Philosophy," People's Publishing House, 1994, pp. 77-78.