Fu Baoshi 傅抱石: Reviewing Traditional Chinese Painting since the Establishment of the Republic of China 民國以來國畫之史的觀察

I: The Literati in Traditional Chinese Painting

一、中國畫的文人畫

A Chinese understanding of art is still (very much) influenced by Confucianism and Taoism, both of which have a history of several thousand years. To this day, this understanding cannot be said to have significantly changed. Although the Western trend (yangfeng 洋風) has been influential for some years now, its influence cannot be considered more than largely superficial. Chinese painters carefully maintain everything that is traditional and conventional. The history of traditional Chinese painting therefore, is most clearly characterised by the ambiguity of technique, resulting in the concealment of the reasons intrinsic to such ambiguity. What’s more, there is not much more than a few biographies of painters and some stories of the painting world to go by. Before June of the 26^th year of the Republic, this situation is not much changed.[1]

中國的藝術思想，還是受着幾千年前的儒家道家思想的支配，直至今日，或亦不能說有了多大的變化。雖然洋風已吹了若干年，但大多數，還只是表面，只是某種極小限度的表面，對於傳統的一切，可謂依然故我，維護得相當周密的。所以中國畫的歷史，只有技法上的歧義，表現的最明顯，因此就把所以歧義的內在原因遮沒了。此外只是些畫人的傳記，和畫壇的故事，此外便沒有什麼。這種情形，在民國二十六年六月以前，絕無例外。

Traditional Chinese paintings developed along two distinctive paths; the Northern School (beizong 北宗), also known as professional painting (zuojia hua 作家畫) and the Southern School (nanzong 南宗), also known as literati painting (wenren hua 文人畫). We have no choice but to take these as our starting points. Faced with this situation, by the time we arrive at the Southern School period, tedium and exasperation is the general feeling…and yet no one is able to come up with solutions to push the boundaries (sifanwei 死範圍). The Southern School and new schools (liupai 流派) were established as the field diverged into schools (liupai hua 流派化) . After the Yuan dynasty, the situation changed a little bit. But literati painting, the so-called Southern School, which accorded more with traditional understandings, replaced professional painting, the so-called Northern School. Among Wen, Shen, Tang and Qiu from the Ming dynasty, and the Four Wangs, Yun and Wu from the Qing dynasty, none of them could ever deny the fact that he was from a school after the further divergence of literati painting.[2] In brief, the new schools of literati painting have dominated traditional Chinese painting for two hundred years. They are frighteningly powerful. Even Japanese painting has also been influenced by their dominancy since the Muromachi period. We could never say the reason was not that Japanese people inscribed the Analects of Confucius and other Classics (jingshu 經書) in the 13^th century, although Japanese people are mercurial.

中國畫兩條不同的道路，南宗北宗，作家畫文人畫，作不得已的進展。因為如此，到了南宗的時候，便大家都感着疲倦，乏味，牽強，… … …，而同時又想不出超越死範圍的辦法。於是南宗也好，北宗也好，自然的形成了一種「流派」而流派化。自元代以後，固然稍稍換了換面目，但不過是文人畫——假定南宗——更合乎傳統的思想，把院體——假定北宗——打倒了而已。明代的文沈唐仇，清代的四王惲吳，誰又不是文人畫流派化後的小流派化？縮短一點說，二百年來的中國畫，都被流派化的文人畫所支配。這種勢力，說起來怪可怕。日本足利時代起，也被它征服得利害，雖然日本人善變，然我們不能說不是十三世紀日本刊刻論語等經書的原因吧？

Objectively speaking, literati painting indeed typifies traditional Chinese painting. Its long and rich history is something European painting could compare with. Chinese people’s faith is unshakeable, regardless of reactionaries, because traditional Chinese painting is rooted within their hearts. To some extent, it has a fixed style, which makes everyone who sees it experience the sensation of “spiritually traveling in an ancient painting” (shenyou yu guhua 神遊於古畫). Most of the painters simply copied this style. Strictly speaking, since the emergence of the Southern School, there was no innovation of style; it was only a matter of proficiency. It had nothing to do with self-expression but rather following the “formula”. Some advocated the “ink and brush stroke” (bimo 筆墨), the “native sensibility and natural wit” (xingling 性靈) and so forth, but where can we find any of them when painters shut themselves in a room painting in the ancient style?[3]

客觀的看看，文人畫的確是代表中國的繪畫。它的源遠流長，簡直非後起的歐洲繪畫可比！因為它抓住了中國人的心，任何反動的勢力。都不能有所搖動，有所改變。它具備某種程度的固定樣式，只要你見着它，便會起一種“神遊於古畫”的共鳴。大多數畫人，無非是這些“樣式”的複製，再嚴格的說，自南宗以來，文人畫家只有技巧的熟與不熟的問題，沒有新樣式的創造。只有“公式”的練習，沒有自我的抒寫。一部分人雖提“筆墨”，“性靈”等口號，試問躲在斗室之中，下筆即為古人所囿，有什麼“筆墨”，“性靈”呢？

In conclusion, traditional Chinese painting is centripetal (qiuxin zhuang 求心狀), because painters explore towards the center. After such a long time immersed in exploration, Chinese painters may bump their heads up against each other’s. Therefore, when they meet, they give knowing smiles, sharing a tacit understanding.

基於上面的論述，中國畫是“求心狀”的，從外向內面鑽。鑽的太久自然會頭碰頭。所以中國畫人的相對，唯有來一個會心的微笑，彼此心照不宣。

Under such circumstances, traditional Chinese painting repetitively “chews up” the ancient “leftovers”.

中國畫便在這種狀態中，反覆的咀嚼古代的殘餘。

There are several necessary norms in literati painting.

作文人畫，要有必需的幾個條件。

A large amount of discussion about these norms has emerged in the painting theory of the Qing dynasty. Chen Shizeng stated in his article, The Value of Chinese Literati Painting (see also Research on Chinese Literati Painting), that there were three requirements for literati painters: Firstly, painters ought to have moral character (renpin 人品). Secondly, they should be talented (tiancai 天才). Thirdly, they need to be knowledgeable (xuewen 學問).[4] According to Yang Ziyun’s statement that “painting reflected real thoughts from one’s heart”, as well as Deng Chun’s statement that “painters with poor literary skills were most unlikely to successfully produce literati painting even though they were familiar with painting techniques”, we can see that the painting theory suggested by Chen Shizeng was not without reason.^[5] After the Yuan dynasty, Chinese people have preferred to regard painting as the painters’ spirit, a representation of their personality and thoughts, considering painting as a pure art. Thus, painting is perceived to be invaluable.

清代的畫論。討論這條件的很多。陳師曾作中國文人畫之價值一文（見中國文人畫之研究）說文人畫家，第一是要有“人品”，第二是要有“天才”，第三是要有“學問”。再看楊子云說的，“畫，心畫也”，和鄧椿說的“其為人也無文，雖有曉畫者寡矣”的話，可見陳師曾的畫法，並不是沒有理由和根據。因為中國自元以後，已把繪畫看做畫家一切的寄託，是畫家人格思想的再現，是純粹的藝術。所以繪畫的價值，是至高無上的。

All sections have changed significantly compared with those 50 years ago. Today, everything we see and hear is different from that in previous times. Even the feelings of everyone are different due to the changes in their lifestyle. According to the history of cultural development, there is no doubt that China needs New Art to match reality. However, we should think about whether Chinese painting now is relevant to modernity (xiandaixing 現代性). For the moment, we can ignore numerous arguments that criticize Chinese painting for being unsuitable for the modern world. As far as the Chinese painting itself is concerned, it has a considerable number of flaws. Nevertheless, the flaws here refer to the over-structured mode of the Chinese painting and have no relevance to whether Chinese painting is good or bad. Painting methods such as the layout, way of painting and the design of color, have become unbreakable regulations. It is clear that if painters refuse to follow these methods from the traditional mode, they will feel extremely bored and frustrated, preferring to make modifications. However, the cruel fact is that painters cannot escape from the invisible influence of the past several thousand years. They are not capable of developing any new thoughts under this influence. Therefore, there is nothing strange about the lack of improvement in Chinese painting.

現在的一切，只要將五十年前的一切來比較，任何部門，都起了急劇的變動。處在今日，耳目所接，當非從前那種形相，甚至因了生活方式的轉易，每個人的感受，也自不同。根據文化的歷史，中國在這時候，需要一種適合現實的新藝術，自無問題。然而我們放眼看看，現在的中國繪畫，和“現代性”有關係么？許多批評中國畫不合現實的理論，姑不管它。就中國畫的本身而論，它的缺陷實在太多。不過這裡所謂缺陷，不是好與不好的問題，是說畫的本身早已僵化了，布局、運筆、設色… … …等技法的動作，也成了牢不可破的定程。我們很明瞭，若是畫家的腦子沒有死守着傳統的方法的話，恐怕誰都有極度的煩悶，誰都有想改革的念頭。然而結果似乎太慘，雖千年來的潛勢力，還整個籠罩了畫家的心，束縛得使你動也不能動。中國畫的不進步，說明了又沒有多大希奇。

From the perspective of subjects determining the painting theme, literati painting is perceived to be negative (xiaoji 消極), frustrated (tuifei 頹廢), old fashioned (lao 老), weak (wu 無), reclusive (yinyi 隱逸), and pessimistic (beiguan 悲觀). It comes from an outlook on life under a narrow sense of Chinese scholar-officials (shidafu 士大夫). For example, these scholar-officials selected to read or draw paintings when they felt tired of playing political games, obtaining intellectual stimulation and reputation for elegance (fengya 風雅). We should be concerned with the issue of what is today’s China. If we consider the art from ethics and morality, is it necessary to carry forward the traditional methods of Chinese painting? Moreover, this formula is as firm as marble and has not been broken for many years. Ultimately, the further development of painting methods is a lost cause.

就取材上說，文人畫是“消極”的，“頹廢”的，“老”的，“無”的，“隱逸”的，“悲觀”的。他是中國士大夫狹義的人生觀，譬如在政治上玩得膩了，看看——或者畫畫——這種東西刺激刺激，博一個風雅的名兒。我們想想，今日的中國，是什麼時代？是什麼環境？若把藝術從“倫理” “道德”上看，這種製作，是否有繼續發揚的必要？況且這種大理石似的公式，許多年來沒有人打得破，發揚也終久是一句似是而非的空話。

In any case, Chinese painting is in urgent need of reform.

中國繪畫，無論如何是有改進的急迫需要。

II: Phenomenon in The Past 26 Years

二、二十六年來的幾種相

In this section, sufficient explanation should be presented. What I discuss below is described in a completely objective way as observations of history without any subjective opinion. Yet, I also refrain from repeating word for word what others say.

在這個小題目之下，應該先有相當的說明。以下所論，完全站在純客觀的立場，從“史的觀察”予以輪廓的述說，絲毫不摻主觀或類似主觀的意見，但又完全不是人云亦云。

In the past 26 years since the establishment of The Republic of China, the most significant development for fine art is the place it has earned in education. Although the norms are still the same, popularization or promotion cannot be started before the Republic of China. The knowledge and practice of painting that students of schools at all levels have learned are almost insulated from the traditional Chinese painting. In a way, except for the very few who learn traditional Chinese painting, the prosperity and decline of traditional Chinese painting has nothing to do with school-based education, especially for young students.

中華民國建國二十六年中，藝術上最顯見的進步，是藝術能在教育上有了位置。雖然現在還是那麼一套，但民國以前，卻談不到普及和提倡的。各級學校的學生，他們所受關於繪畫上的智識和練習，幾乎可以說，與中國固有的絕緣。照某方面情形論，中國繪畫的盛衰，和學校教育無關。尤其和青年學生——除了學中國畫的極少數——無關。

In the past 26 years, artists separated themselves from the environment of domestic turmoil and foreign invasions, as if they live in another world. Even if the painting was produced, the painter’s style still implied “carefree, I see the southern hill”.^[6] We cannot blame the painters for being brainless – the barriers of the factions are so strong that if you were to come up with anything new, you would be subject to abuse and taunts.

二十六年來，國內仍然是動亂着，國外的侵略壓迫，這些環境遠遠的隔離，好像生存在另外一個世界。縱有製作，也還是些“悠然見南山”之類。這不能怪畫家沒有腦筋，只怪“流派化”的壁壘太堅，你要是稍微來一點新花樣，保管你被人罵得狗血淋頭。

Yet, can we say there is no one in Chinese painting who is forging new paths? This is not the case.

然則中國畫沒有從事新的途徑的人么？這又不然。

I have a thought: In the past 26 years of the Republic of China, especially in the past ten years, there is something that is very unreasonable. The evaluation of Chinese artists were based on “interpersonal relationships” (renshi 人事) instead of art. Could you find even one exhibition without many celebrities’ signed introductions? These celebrities may not know the artists who requested it or did not read their works, let alone understand their art. Therefore, there are only the people who listen well but cannot see anything. As a result, those introduced by the right person quickly leap ahead and soon consider themselves to be a master, while the one who introduces such people plays the role of a god in the painting world. This kind of environment dramatically affects the progress of art.

我有一種感想，我覺得民國二十六年來，——尤其近十年——有一件不十分可解的事。這件事，就是中國的藝術家，他的評價，完全建築在“人事”上面的，藝術還在其次。你看誰開畫展，不是許多許多的人署名介紹？這班名人，也許他並不認識這請求的人，或者並未拜讀過他的作品，如何能知道他的藝術？如此一來，社會上只剩有耳而瞎了眼睛了。於是被介紹者一躍自居名家。介紹者也儼然畫壇盟主。這種情形，影響於藝術的進步是極大的。

Furthermore, when talking about the dynamics of Chinese painting, the most influential painter is Wu Changshuo.^[7] His paintings of flowers and fruits (huaguo 花果) and landscapes (shanshui 山水), even his calligraphy, have influenced so many people who have studied painting. His art, of course, is the result of his efforts over decades to write Stone Drums Inscriptions (liejie 獵碣).^[8] Therefore, there is a track of each stroke, not exclusively acquired from the layout of the frame. However, the people who followed him are not the same. I have thought about why Wu Changshuo’s paintings had such a profound impact that they have almost dominated the flower and fruit paintings of East China. Perhaps this is because landscape painting is too cumbersome and too time-consuming, not to mention the disorder in this world. Who is willing to concentrate on work which takes “five days to draw one mountain and ten days for one river” (wuri yishan shiri yishui 五日一山十日一水)? Just a few casual strokes are also very elegant. The influence of Wu Changshuo arises under such circumstances. Otherwise, the Japanese are extremely respectful of his works. Why did the Japanese painters not follow him? I heard that the price of his work is not as high as that in 1923, and this may be the sign that his influence is getting weaker.

進一步，談中國畫的動態，影響最大的要推吳昌碩。他的花果山水之類，甚至於他的字，不知影響了多少學畫的人。他本身的藝術，當然是他幾十年寫獵碣的功夫所得來，所以他每一筆都有淵源，並不是專從間架布置上取得的。學的人就不然了。我曾想，吳昌碩的畫，為什麼會有這麼大的影響？幾乎可以支配華東的花果畫。這或者是山水太繁瑣了，太費時間了，加之天下又不太平，誰肯安心去做那五日一山十日一水的工作？隨便來幾筆也正見得楚楚有致。吳昌碩的影響，當在這種情形之下而發生作用。不然，日本人對於他的作品，是極其尊重的，為什麼日本人沒有學他的畫家？聽說他的作品的價錢，不如民國一十二年那麼高，這也許是他的影響日漸薄弱之徵。

Paintings in the Qi Baishi style are similar to the flower and fruit paintings of Wu Changshuo.^[9] It can be said that Qi’s seal is too majestic to directly or indirectly impact many people, but it is rare to capture his spirit. In recent years, his paintings have been praised highly by some people in the north, and are regarded as no less important than those of Wu Changshuo back around 1921.

畫與吳昌碩同是花果一類的作風，則有齊白石式。齊氏摹印，魄力之雄偉，可以說直接間接已衝動了許多印人，但能得他的精神的，卻不多見。他的畫近幾年來，頗為北方一部分人所推重，並不減於民國十年左右之對於吳昌碩。

As we know, in the late Qing Dynasty, works of flowers and birds (huaniao 花鳥), feathers (lingmao 翎毛), grass and insects (caochong 草蟲), vegetables and fruits (shuguo 蔬果) – works from the fragrance hall – still have the most significant impact.^[10] Subsequent painters like Zhang Xiong and Shanyin Renshi and Li Futang, Zhao Zhiqian or Jin Dongxin’s style, although they had their different styles, they still did not dare stray too far from the norms.^[11] Wu Changshuo is different; he is bolder. Qi is even more different, and the composition of some of his works are really fascinating. However, both Wu Changshuo and Qi Baishi lived in the period of great turmoil in China. The cultural direction had been greatly shaken and was changing. People also felt precarious. As a result, it was inevitable for him to generate this style.

我們知道，清末的花鳥翎毛草蟲蔬果之類的作品，還是甌香館的餘韻有勢力。以後張熊及山陰任氏和李復堂趙之謙，或是金冬心之派流，雖曾在構圖上各有各的面目，但仍不敢逾越規矩太遠。吳昌碩不同，膽大多了。齊氏更不同，有些構圖，確令人神往。不過自吳昌碩，到齊白石，正是中國大動亂的時候。文化方向已受巨大動搖而漸趨轉變，人心的不安定，產生這種作風，自是必然的結果。

As stated previously, landscape painting was supposed to reverse the trend of new schools established by the Four Wangs to a simple style, and to be unrestrained by propriety. However, that is not the case. Two reasons can account for this issue: The shapes of mountains and rivers are different; the boundary of literati painting which takes mountains and rivers as the essential is strict. For example, in the era of Jieziyuan, Ren Yi and Yang Borun had already embarked on this kind of reform, but the influence was slight.^[12] For landscape painters, painting mountains and rivers can only be a source of occasional amusement, rather than a reliable source of income. Hence, landscape painting is different from the painting of flowers and fruits.

山水畫呢，據上述的理由，當然也應由四王的流派，轉趨簡的疏放才對，然實際上不盡如此。這因為山水的構造不同，同時也因為以山水為本位的文人畫的壁壘太嚴，如芥子園時代的任頤、楊伯潤，早就着手過這種改革，但為流不遠，只可供山水畫家偶然的遊戲，不能供經常的經營。山水較之花果等，其不同就在此。

During the time of Emperor Guangxu, landscapes painted by Lu Hui and Qin Zuyong might be regarded as “superior to the Four Wangs” if evaluating their paintings by the same standard.^[13] Therefore, painting landscape had requirements. Painters in the Song dynasty discovered six or seven out of ten. Painters in the Yuan dynasty learned eight or nine out of ten. Painters like the Four Great Masters of the Ming dynasty were entirely capable of applying these norms. For painters in the Qing dynasty, they were trapped in a circle and had to continuously pace to and fro. As a result, even if Lu Hui and Qin Zuyong were consummate painters, they could not escape this. Not surprisingly, we see such conditions continue to dwindle in the Republic of China.

光緒間，陸恢秦祖永… … …等人的山水。若用欣賞四王的眼光來看，即說是“超四王而上之”，也未嘗不可。足見山水畫自有山水畫的一切條件，這些條件，宋人得了十之六七，元人得了十之八九,明人——如四大家——是十分之十，清人就只得在這圈子裡旋轉了。所以廉夫,逸芬等的工夫雖雄厚，也脫不了那一道圈子。降而至於民國，也就可想而知。

It is common to see several sub-fields within fields. For instance, Wu Daiqiu and Tang Dingzhi adhered to their own norms.^[14] Their achievements were remarkable, and their masterpieces had endured throughout the ages within their own communities. However, the gap between their aspiration and reality is still wide when seeing the initial architecture of landscape painting that was first constructed in the Song dynasty but further renovated in the Yuan, Ming and early Qing dynasties. Based on these assumptions, Xiao Zhiquan, Fu Xinyu, Zhang Daqian as well as Hu Peiheng were essential figures.^[15] The influence of these painters on landscape is still profound. These four painters all had impressive masterpieces – by no means imitations of the Four Masters from the Yuan dynasty or Shi Tao – but fabulous in their own way nonetheless.^[16] Just like a courtyard with only one gate, people inside need not specify whether they are on the east side or the west side, as the gate is the only way to enter and exit. In Japan, during the Tenpō period, Tani Bunchō and Watanabe Kazan once “lived” in this courtyard as well.^[17]

在大圈子之中，復不少有小圈子的。如吳待秋湯定之二氏，各自祖述他們的衣缽，功夫境界，均有可傳，這是就圈子說圈子的話。從高處一望，依然距理想有相當距離的。根據這假定條件，再看蕭厔泉溥心畲張大千甚至於胡佩衡諸位，他們對於山水，站在宋朝建築元明清初修葺過的山水舞台上，都是重要的角色，都有聲容並茂的佳作，而這些佳作，就是不聲明仿元四大家（吳鎮，王蒙，黃公望，倪瓚）或仿清湘老人（石濤的別名，大滌子，原濟老人，苦瓜和尚），也自有其不可埋沒的精彩。譬如一座大院落，只有一個大門，在內面的，進出必須由此，所以用不着聲明你是東邊，我是西邊了。日本天保時的“谷文晁” “渡邊華山” 也住過這裡面呢。

As for Chinese art, Chen Shuren, Gao Jianfu, Gao Qifeng, Xu Beihong and Liu Haisu had aspirations to reform and had been engaged in reforming traditional Chinese painting for years.^[18] Each painter had his own strong points, and they all had quite a lot of followers. The Gao Brothers (Gao Jianfu and Gao Qifeng) advocated new Chinese painting in the southern area of the Nanling Mountains for a long time.^[19] Xu Beihong embarked on art education in Beijing. Liu Haisu undertook the same career in Shanghai. Both of them received many young disciples. I am digressing. This article is not concerned with delving into these topics.

至於對於中國藝術——某一點上趨重中國畫——抱有改革的大願，並且實際從事多年，各有其千秋的陳樹人高劍父高奇峯徐悲鴻劉海粟諸位，彼此都擁有相當的崇拜者。高氏兄弟在嶺南長時期的提倡新國畫，徐劉兩位分在京滬從事藝術的教育，都有若干青年所願意景從，但本文不欲越出題外說什麼話。

After Gao Qifeng passed away, the painting style which thrived in the southern area of the Nanling Mountains spread from the Pearl River to the Yangtze River thanks to the efforts of Gao Jianfu. Such a campaign reflected the times, neither an accident nor a meaningless event. Last year, Gao Jianfu opened the Chun Shui Painting Academy Exhibition in Nanjing and Shanghai.^[20] Although this exhibition lasted for just a few days, the excepted effects were attained. Hundreds of exhibits showed shades of rendering, unconsciously aligning with the Japanese painting style. I will discuss the Japanese painting style in the following chapter.

高奇峯氏逝世了，劍父也年來將滋長於嶺南的畫風由珠江流域展到了長江。這種運動，不是偶然，也不是毫無意義，是有其時代性的。高氏主持的春睡畫院畫展，去年在南京上海舉行，雖然在幾天短短的期間，也有掀動起預期的效果。但展品數百中間有渲染陰影，無識者流，以為近於日本作風。關於日本畫風，後面再談。

At the Chun Shui Painting Academy Exhibition, the works that I appreciated the most were the figure paintings of Fang Rending, the drawings and landscape paintings of Li Xiongcai and Rong Dakuai.^[21] In the very least, these three painters accomplished breaking down the restrictions of “convention” and “schools”. Meanwhile, their painting style achieved huge success, which was amazing.

我對於春睡畫院畫展里，有二位的畫我最佩服，一是方人定的人物，一是黎雄才容大塊的寫生——山水——這三位，最低限度，可以說是某部分上打破了“傳統的” “流派化的”的束縛，同時所走的途徑，已有相當的成功，是值得驚異的。

Flowers painted by Chen Shuren were unique. His paintings were free from the norms and principles established by previous painters. The usage of lights and shadows showed a new technique. Color in his painting was bright and graceful.

陳樹人的花卉，另剏一格，脫離古人羈絆，陰陽向背，均表一種新的技法，色彩有清秀明麗之氣。

Both Xu Beihong and Liu Haisu had collections of their traditional Chinese paintings. Xu Beihong created a new painting style and reformed the way of sketching the leaves in landscape painting by alternatively employing Western painting techniques.^[22] Therefore, each painting was brand new. At present, many painters are imitating these new painting techniques and applying them to horses, chickens, cats and so on, which shows that many painters hold high aspirations to reform traditional Chinese painting.

徐劉兩位，關於中國畫的集子，各有幾種。徐的畫，創造了一種新的樣式，又將寫山水的樹葉皺擦等等，予以革命，而代以西洋畫的技法。所以每一張畫都有一種新面目。譬如馬、雞、貓… … …等樣，現在在模仿的很多，足見有改進中國畫志氣的人不在少數。

Liu Haisu painted mountains and rivers, flowers and birds, fowls and beasts (zoushou 走獸), as well as vegetables and fruits in his traditional Chinese paintings. On the reform of Chinese painting, Liu Haisu only retained some elements of the conventional norms; he had already bravely adopted new painting techniques.

劉氏的中國畫，山水花鳥走獸蔬果都寫。就中國畫的革命上論，劉的作品，對於傳統的氣氛，只保留些成分；對於新的技法，已放膽的引用。

III: The Japanese Influence and Other Matters

三、日本影響及其他

To be honest, I am reluctant to write about Japan.

說起“日本”，頗使我不願下筆。

It is quite fashionable to talk about Japan recently. Though, what is the connection between our artists and Japan? We always found that some traces of Japanese paintings, such as the bird and flower painting styles of Kōno Bairei and Watanabe Shōtei, the cow painting styles of Hashimoto Kansetsu, or shanshui painting styles of Yokoyama Taikan, frequently appeared in many Chinese painters’ works or prints with comments like, “This artist’s paintings are stylized by Nihonga.”^[23] Meanwhile, some so-called painting skills, such as Quintessence of Nihonga (Ribenhua dacheng 日本畫大成), Compilation of Nanzonghua Skills (Nanzonghua xuancui 南宗畫選粹) and Appreciation of Kōno Bairei’s Works (Meilin huajian 梅嶺畫鑒) are treated as precious and used widely in works by plenty of painters.^[24] Indeed, the Chinese painting world is bustling with activity. Moreover, some even go from Shanghai to stay a few days in Japan to pretend that they are “famous” in East Asia or their works are “favored” by the Japanese when they return home.

近來能談日本的是相當時髦了。但書畫家們和日本的因緣是如何呢？我們在很多中國畫家的作品——或印刷品——中，可以看出“幸野梅嶺” “渡邊省亭”的花鳥，“橋本關雪”的牛，“橫山大觀”的山水，… … …等的一現再現，同時又聽到 “某人的畫日本畫法呀” 的話。同時又隨處可見着 “日本畫大成”“南宗畫選粹”“楳嶺畫鑒” … … …在畫家們手裡寶貝般的運用。這樣，中國畫壇便熱鬧了。再不然，由上海到日本去勾留幾天，回國來，也好說“名重東亞”“甚為彼邦所推重”。

I want to say to those who care about the Japanese painting world: The Japanese only care for the works of Chinese painters who died more than 200 years ago and regard all others as worthless. The Japanese look down on the Chinese painters of today. Chinese painters of today, though they may be active in Europe, have to be careful in Japan! To be sure, the Japanese are still studying Chinese painting as well, but their motivations for doing so are by no means naïve in design. Among those modern Nanga (Nanhua 南畫) painters, only a few of them are still doing Chinese traditional paintings.^[25] All the others are inscribed with poems in the new style of Chinese imitation. Most of them have already established their own schools. Others are in the new style; though the painting styles are their own and widely inspired by many realistic themes, they inscribe poems and credit their own names on the painting. Among those works in the annual Imperial Academy of Fine Arts Exhibition (Diguo meishuyuan zhan 帝國美術院展), none of them are mounted as a guazhou (hanging scroll 掛軸), although there are more mounting shops (Biaohua dian 裱畫店) in Japan than in China.^[26]

我可以告訴關心日本畫壇的人。中國畫在日本，除了死去在二百年以上的作家，也許換得到他們幾文。他們對於現在的中國作家，是看不起的。——中國畫家儘管在歐洲可以起勁，在日本就要注意了！——至於他們研究中國畫，那目的又複雜的很。在現代的南畫家（純中國畫）群里，只有極少數少數的幾位，其他都是新派的仿中國的作風題詩加款的，大多數早已變成了自己的面目。能把現實的許多題材，廣泛的應用。每年一度的帝國美術院展，就沒有一點是裱成掛軸的出品，雖然裱畫店比中國多。

However, it is well known by those who have been to Tokyo that Nihonga draws lessons from Chinese paintings. But the pen, paper and pigments of Nihonga are far more complete and functional than China’s. At the same time, Japanese painters favor Chinese nature landscape as well and often come to China to sketch. For example, the scenery paintings of Takeuchi Seihōand and Hashimoto Kansetsu from Kyoto are considered masterpieces.^[27] There are also many painters in Suzhou. Why cannot they produce famous works that can represent the city and the era? This is related to the genre of Chinese painting. At this point we should return to the issue of Chinese painting genres.

但日本對於中國繪畫的參考，以至於筆紙顏色，卻遠比中國完備，便利，這是到過東京的人便可知道的。同時日本畫家，又非常羨慕中國的自然，常常到中國來寫生，像京都的竹內棲鳳氏和橋本關雪氏，他們畫的蘇州景物，已成名作。蘇州也不少畫家，為何沒有地方性和時代性的作品？這又牽到中國畫流派化的題上去了。

Although Japanese painters do not paint in a completely Chinese way, their skills and materials mostly accord with traditional Chinese painting. In particular, the skills of rendering (xuanran 渲染) in Nihonga are all from the rendering of Song Dynasty paintings, which may not be very well understood by Chinese artists nowadays (this method has been lost in China for a long time). For more illustrations, silk for painting (huajuan 畫絹), jute paper (mazhi 麻紙) and blue and green color pigments (qinglv 青綠) for shanshui paintings are all delicately produced in Japan while hard to find in China.^[28]

日本的畫家，雖然不作純中國風的畫，而他們方法材料，則還多是中國的古法子，尤其是渲染更全是宋人方法了，這也許中國的畫家們還不十分懂得的，因這方法我國久已失傳。譬如畫絹、麻紙、山水上用的青綠顏色，日本的都非常精緻，有的中國並無製造。

To be sure, over the past two decades, China has increased its contacts with Japan in many aspects, including conversations among painters, and we cannot deny that Chinese painting has been influenced directly or indirectly by Japan. However, from the professional perspective of painting skills, it is held that adopting the Japanese approach does not imply we are being Japanized, but rather that we are learning from ourselves. The skills and approaches of traditional Chinese painting have either not been popularized enough or past generations have failed in handing them down. So, we shall turn to Japan to take them back.

中國近二十幾年，自然在許多方面和日本接觸的機會增多，就畫家論，來往的也不少。直接間接都受着相當的影響。不過專家從繪畫的方法上講，採取日本的方法，不能說是日本化，而應當認為是學自己的。因為自己不普遍，或已失傳，或是不用了，轉向日本採取而回的。

As for those conservative painters, their minds are full of the painting methods from the ancient painters. However, they often follow the beaten track and stick to outdated methods. Most of them look down upon works that are even slightly different from traditional paintings. We are well aware that Chinese paintings are in an over-structured mode and should be given new life and meaning to make them fit into the present age. However, when recalling the recent past, although several masters engaged in this innovative movement, such as Gao Jianfu, I am afraid that they also encountered unexpected obstacles and were attacked and pushed aside by traditional painters.

保守的畫家們，滿眼滿腦子的“古人”，往往又“食古不化”“死守成法”。對於稍稍表現不同的作品，多半加以白眼，嗤之以鼻。我們很明白的中國的畫僵了，應該重新賦予新的生命，新的面目，使適合當時代的一切。然而回想最近的過去，雖然有幾位先生從事這種革新的運動——如高劍父等——，恐怕也到處遭遇着意外的阻礙。受着傳統畫家們的排擠攻擊。

I have to repeat what I have already mentioned. Chinese culture developed in the west of the country, from the Yellow River Basin to the Yangtze River Basin, and then to the Pearl River Basin. As for East Asian culture, it was developed from Tianshan in the east to Korea and then to Japan. If you separate and look at the development of culture in different countries from the present situation, according to my personal opinion, it seems that how developed a culture is can be regarded as an inverse proportion with time. That is, where the culture develops earlier, the worse the situation is now. On the contrary, where the culture develops later, the better the culture is developed now. In the East Asian context, Japan developed the latest and India developed the earliest, but India is in the worst situation now. In China, the Pearl River Basin is the youngest, the northwest of the Yellow River is the oldest, but is also in the worst situation now. If we were to take this supposition, then the innovation of Chinese painting should be counted on the Pearl River Basin. Zhu Qianzhi said the following words, with which I agree wholeheartedly:^[29]

又要說幾句舊話了。中國的文化，是從西來的，是從黃河流域發展到長江流域，再到珠江流域的。就東洋言，是從天山東走，到朝鮮，再到日本的。若是截開來的看，在現在的情況，據個人的管見，似乎可以把文化的高下，隨時代看成一個反比例。即是文化發達愈早的地方，現在愈不行，愈倒霉，反之文化後起的地方則愈前進愈厲害。在東洋，日本是後起的，印度最古，但也最苦。在中國，珠江流域是後起的，黃河的西北最古，但也最苦。假如這種推想有點像，那麼，中國畫的革新或者要希望珠江流域了。朱謙之說過下面一段話，我非常同情。他說：

“Undoubtedly, the only hope for the Chinese nation to survive is the south part of China, which is the Pearl River Basin. The north part of China expresses conservative culture on politics; its characteristic is obedience not resistance. The characteristic of progressive culture in the middle part of China is conformity rather than resistance. Only the South can truly express revolutionary culture. Its cultural characteristic is resistance to the Western powers and that is exactly the revolutionary culture that China needs now.” (Appendix to Cultural Philosophy Southern Cultural Movement Business, Page 261-262)

要使中華民族不亡，唯一的希望，無疑乎只有南方，只在南方即珠江流域。北方在政治上表現保守的文化，其特質為服從而非抵抗；中部表現進步的文化其特質為順應亦非抵抗，只有南方才真正表現革命的文化，其文化特質就是反抗強權，現在中國所需要的正是反抗強權之革命的文化。… … …（文化哲學附錄南方文化運動商務版頁二六一——二六二）

Although Zhu’s words are based on the overall views of culture, it is truly the most meaningful and interesting thing to observe the painters I mentioned before through this territorial (cultural development) lens. To sum up and draw a conclusion: since the Southern Song Dynasty, Chinese literati paintings have flourished, but they have formed different schools. Its influence has remained intact until now. Because the traditional forces are so strong, it is very difficult for “obedient” and “conformist” painters to reform.

朱氏的話，雖從文化的全體立論，若試把我前面提及畫家按着地理去觀察，實在最有意義且最有趣味的。總括一下，立此結論：中國從南宋以後文人畫大盛，但形成了“流派化”。其影響直至今日還安然未動。因為傳統的勢力太烈，“服從”“順應”的畫家，是很難有所改革的。

Since the establishment of the Republic of China, whether we are discussing the drawing of flowers, birds or landscapes, all paintings inherited the traditions of bygone eras. Although there are several outstanding works, we cannot say that Chinese paintings have made progress. Masters of art education and celebrities who like collecting Chinese paintings: please stop holding back new creations and new attempts. Otherwise, Chinese painting will fall behind. Please do not heap praise on works that subordinate or conform to traditions. It will be a slap in the face for people who want to reform.

民國以來，無論花鳥山水… … …還是因襲前期的傳統，僅管有極精的作品，然不能說中國畫有了進步。與藝術教育有關的先生們乃至喜歡玩玩中國畫的名流們，請不再遏止新的創作，新的嘗試。否則中國畫只有向後轉的。請不必過事頌揚服從或順應傳統的作品，這樣等於打有志改革者的耳光。

The times are moving on. What about Chinese painting? No matter whether it is Westernized, Indianized or Japanized, when Chinese painters are trying to reform, they should refer to the outside world. Only those who obey and conform to traditions are out of date.

時代是前進的，中國畫呢？西洋化也好，印度化也好，日本化也好，在尋求出路的時候，不妨多方走走，只有服從順應的，才是落伍。