[Ji Zhongyang, Chen Yu] On the innovative protection of intangible cultural heritage such as traditional handicrafts
Abstract: Innovation is an inherent requirement for the independent protection of intangible cultural heritage such as traditional handicrafts.
The intrinsic driving force for innovation of craftsmen is not the self-discipline of artistic development, but industry competition and the pressure of heteronomy.
Therefore, in the practice of protecting intangible cultural heritage such as handicrafts, full attention should be paid to the overall protection of the traditional handicraft industry.
Only when the entire industry is dynamic and competitive can intangible cultural heritage truly have vitality.
Different from the spirit of "betrayal innovation" in modern art, traditional handicrafts have always practiced the basic principle of "innovation while inheritance" in the process of historical development.
It includes three aspects.
First, never abandon the source, and never stay away from the needs of daily life for innovation.
Second, we must constantly innovate and surpass our skills, but aim to strive for excellence, rather than deliberately seeking innovation and differences to express our individuality.
Third, we should not distance ourselves from the inherent aesthetic psychology of the nation due to innovation.
Keywords: Intangible cultural heritage; traditional handicrafts; productive protection
introduction
Whether handicrafts intangible cultural heritage can be innovated is not a new topic.
In recent years, there have been many discussions on this issue in academic circles.
In fact, academic circles usually conduct discussions based on the perspective of productive protection of handicrafts and intangible cultural heritage.
At present, scholars 'discussions on related topics mainly focus on the following three aspects.
The first is Xu Yiyi, Song Junhua, Chen Huawen and other scholars 'discussions on the relationship between handicraft intangible cultural heritage innovation and its authenticity "protection".
For example, Xu Yiyi believes that the principle of productive protection for intangible cultural heritage, including traditional skills, traditional art and other categories, is a protection method implemented in accordance with the laws of the development of intangible cultural heritage itself.
Its purpose is not to develop intangible cultural heritage resources into industry, but to protect.
Chen Huawen found that productive protection of intangible cultural heritage means that intangible cultural heritage forms with productive characteristics can be protected under the principle of authenticity and on-site through a unique way of production methods or processes.
Song Junhua once clearly pointed out that productive protection is a compromise between radicals and conservatives in the process of intangible cultural heritage protection, emphasizing that exploring protection methods from the nature of intangible cultural heritage, that is, production, is a sustainable protection that conforms to the nature of intangible cultural heritage.
way.
The second is Liu Delong, Zhu Yiqing and other scholars 'discussions on the interactive relationship between handicraft intangible cultural heritage innovation and people's daily life.
For example, Liu Delong believes that handicrafts are formed through long practice and are inseparable from the practical needs of people's production and life in contemporary society.
The true meaning of productive protection is the equal emphasis on protecting tradition and reform and innovation.
Zhu Yiqing also proposed that the best way to productively protect the intangible cultural heritage of rival crafts is to maintain its core skills and core values in life, and closely connect it with people's lives, so that it can be passed down for a long time in life.
The third is Tian Qian, Qian Yongping and other scholars 'research on the relationship between handicraft intangible cultural heritage innovation and social and cultural construction.
For example, Tian Qian believes that only by building a good cultural and ecological environment and reconstructing it into a new and holistic meaning shared by producers, consumers and cultural elites can we generate "synergy" in the process of productive protection of intangible cultural heritage and make it possible to "see people, see things, and see life" The concept of intangible cultural heritage protection has become a reality.
Qian Yongping recently found through field research on Lingshang embroidery in Shanxi that the local embroidery industry organization consisting of design, production, marketing and sales links established with handmade embroidery skills as the core has successfully transformed embroidery from cultural resources into cultural industries., not only recreating the new cultural ecology of local handmade embroidery, but also making positive contributions to sustainable social development, especially inclusive economic development.
Taken together, there is an inseparable structural connection between handicraft intangible cultural heritage innovation and productive protection of intangible cultural heritage, and it profoundly affects the local practice process of productive protection of intangible cultural heritage.
Further, the academic community has formed two completely different views on whether handicrafts and intangible cultural heritage can be innovated and its specific innovation methods and paths.
On the one hand, some scholars have proposed that intangible cultural heritage has been constantly changing in history, and there is no original ecological or authentic intangible cultural heritage.
Therefore, intangible cultural heritage can certainly be innovated, and the results of innovation certainly belong to intangible cultural heritage.
On the other hand, some scholars believe that innovation and protection of handicrafts are "mutually exclusive" to a certain extent.
Although intangible cultural heritage can be innovated, the results after innovation can only be said to be future intangible cultural heritage.
Therefore, Intangible cultural heritage innovation does not belong to the category of intangible cultural heritage protection, but is a work goal of mass cultural activities, professional art production and cultural market development.
Later, some scholars represented by Yuan Li even threw out important conclusions such as "the greatest value of intangible cultural heritage is its historical cognitive value, and intangible cultural heritage cannot be innovated or changed." This was widely discussed by the academic community and formed a series of extended thoughts on whether intangible cultural heritage can be innovated.
Of course, in my opinion, it is very reasonable for some scholars to advocate the preservation of cultural genes, but continuous innovation is not only an inherent requirement for independent protection of intangible cultural heritage, but also an inevitable choice for it to integrate into modern life and then exert its due cultural influence.
Therefore, the key question is not whether handicrafts can be innovated, but what is the motivation for "innovation"? How to "innovate" to ensure that it does not lose its intangible cultural heritage?
1.
Innovation: Independent protection of intangible cultural heritage of traditional handicrafts
Let's first talk about why traditional handicrafts and intangible cultural heritage can be continuously innovated.
When discussing this issue, most predecessors forgot to ask why traditional handicrafts cannot be innovated.
The reason why people first presuppose that intangible cultural heritage cannot be innovated is actually because of the concept of "heritage".
They believe that since intangible cultural heritage is heritage, it should undoubtedly maintain its original state.
Therefore, issues such as "original ecology" and "authenticity" are naturally proposed.
However, intangible cultural heritage is different from general heritage.
Although it involves material existences such as "tools, objects, handicrafts and cultural places", it is more important to be non-material such as "social practice, conceptual expression, forms of expression, knowledge, and skills".
An existence of no definite form.
For existence without definite form, there is obviously no such thing as "original ecology" and "authenticity".
If the existing state is regarded as a native state left over from history and is considered to have certain historical value, it is enough to preserve this state in an image, and there is no need to remain complacent.
Historically, the intangible cultural heritage of handicrafts has been constantly changing.
"In the development of handicrafts, it is not always completely made with bare hands and hand tools.
From the simplest human machinery to electric machinery and copying and copying technologies, modern technology has gradually penetrated into the craftsmanship making skills." Even the same craftsman cannot repeat his own handmade work immutable, and often adapt to the times, places, and people.
When we interviewed the national-level intangible cultural heritage inheritors of "Qinhuai Lanterns", we discovered an interesting phenomenon.
On the one hand, the inheritors criticized other lantern artists from time to time for doing new tricks, which were not the original "Qinhuai Lanterns".
On the other hand, they emphasized that they understand design, can innovate, and do better than their fathers.
After designing them,"I will let them comment on them.
Tourists from north to south, as well as scholars, ask them which looks better and what should be done, and take everyone's strengths to make up for my shortcomings." Obviously, the intangible cultural heritage inheritor consciously innovates in practice, and opposing innovation has become his "power discourse" to criticize others with the help of state power.
In fact, concepts such as "original ecology" and "authenticity" have never been mentioned in UNESCO's Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003).
On the contrary, it emphasizes the issue of innovation and believes that intangible cultural heritage "can be" constantly recreated "as communities and groups adapt to their surrounding environment and interact with nature and history.
The UNESCO Intergovernmental Committee for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage clearly stated in the "Ethical Principles for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage" reviewed and adopted in November 2015 that "the dynamic and living nature of intangible cultural heritage should always be respected." Authenticity and exclusivity should not constitute problems or obstacles to the protection of intangible cultural heritage."
Let's talk about why traditional handicrafts must be innovated.
UNESCO's Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003) clearly states that "'protection 'refers to various measures to ensure the vitality of intangible cultural heritage, including the identification, documentation, research, preservation, protection, promotion, inheritance (especially through formal and informal education) and revitalization of all aspects of such heritage." In this regard, the main purpose of intangible cultural heritage protection is to protect its "vitality", not just "living inheritance".
The question is, how to protect the vitality of intangible cultural heritage? Based on the theoretical premise of "people are in the art", using state power to protect intangible cultural heritage inheritors through project funding seems to ensure their living inheritance, but it does not help ensure their vitality.
Sometimes it is even counterproductive, especially in the field of traditional handicrafts and intangible cultural heritage.
The intervention of state forces may undermine the rules of equal competition in the market, and endogenous creativity based on market demand will be curbed.
People of insight have long seen this problem and put forward the concept of "productive protection", confirming the importance of the market itself for the protection of intangible cultural heritage of traditional handicrafts-market demand is the blood of intangible cultural heritage of traditional handicrafts.
Once blood is lost, blood transfusion from state power can at most maintain its "living state", but it is impossible to revitalize it.
Gao Xiaokang believes that the concept of "productive protection" is just a reaffirmation of the commercialization of intangible cultural heritage and has nothing new.
In fact, the concept of "productive protection" not only recognizes the productization and commercialization of intangible cultural heritage, but also implies The expectation that intangible cultural heritage can be self-reliant, that is,"self-protection" based on market demand, has actually touched on the core issue of intangible cultural heritage protection.
So, how to achieve "self-protection" based on market demand? The author believes that the key lies in being able to keep pace with the times and constantly innovate.
In fact, intangible cultural heritage such as Yangzhou jade carving, Yixing purple clay pot making, and Su embroidery that do not require "protection by others" have been seeking innovation and change.
Take Su embroidery as an example.
On the one hand, it not only uses machine embroidery, but also the machine embroidery patterns are becoming more and more abundant; on the other hand, manual embroidery skills are also constantly innovating.
On the basis of flat needle embroidery and random needle embroidery, fusion needle embroidery has been developed.
Recently, Su embroidery masters such as Zou Yingzi have created "Didi Embroidery" that is good at expressing the effect of oil painting.
Many intangible cultural relics of handicrafts that were once daily necessities do not necessarily disappear with the changes of social life, such as bamboo weaving, willow weaving, wood carving, paper binding, etc.
Through continuous innovation with the times, they can still continue to maintain youthful vitality.
For example,"Liu's Bamboo Weaving" in Qu County, Sichuan Province.
The inheritor Liu Jiang boldly combined traditional bamboo weaving craftsmanship with modern fashion design elements, and launched a new series of bamboo weaving products with novel and unique designs, which not only meets the aesthetic demands of contemporary people, but also loses the cultural charm of traditional bamboo weaving.
The market recognition is very high."Liu's Bamboo Weaving" now not only has nearly 100 technicians, but its products are exported to more than 30 countries and regions, with an annual output value of about 5 million yuan.
In addition, more than 500 local farmers have been attracted to join.
Are innovative handicrafts still intangible cultural heritage? Whether it is the government, society, or academic circles, there is this question.
First, the intangible cultural heritage of handicrafts has always been changing, but some changes have been small, and craftsmen rarely flaunt "innovation", so people mistakenly believe that traditional handicrafts are "always like this." We can accept the constant changes in handicrafts in the course of history, but of course we should recognize that contemporary traditional handicrafts are still in the process of historical evolution.
The so-called "innovation" is just self-awareness due to historical evolution.
Second, as a traditional handicraft with intangible cultural heritage, its innovation should have certain principles and limits.
This is the issue that will be discussed below.
2.
Industry competition: the innovation power of craftsmen
If you ask a craftsman why he keeps making this style without changing it, he will usually say that the older generation did it.
People can draw the conclusion that craftsmen are "inheritors" rather than innovators.
In ancient and modern times, when we talk about craftsmen, we will emphasize that craftsmen are not innovative.
For example,"Kao Gong Ji" said,"The wise create things, the clever ones describe and keep them, and the world calls them works." However, most of the creators are capable among all workers, but they never boast of this.
Cultural elites claim that the creators are "wise men" who are purely engaged in mental work.
When Liu Zongyue marveled at the "beauty of miscellaneous utensils", he said that the craftsmen who made miscellaneous utensils "just inherited the ancestral methods and kept making them without confusion.""The beauty of miscellaneous utensils is unintentional beauty." In fact, this is just a romantic imagination.
If Liu Zongyue really goes to these craftsmen and becomes heart-to-heart friends with them, he will definitely find that these craftsmen are by no means "unintentional", especially those skilled craftsmen.
The reason why they are "skillful" is precisely because of their "souls".
Most of them love to ponder and are good at innovating.
In fact, Japanese craftsmen have always attached great importance to innovation.
They have a concept called "guarding and breaking", which means,"At first, they are loyal to the form taught by the 'guarding' master, then 'breaking' the form and applying it yourself, and finally 'leaving' form creates your own new realm."
It is not that craftsmen are not innovative, nor are they unable to innovate, but they do not say anything and never flaunt innovation.
Compared with artists who are cultural elites, the innovation of craftsmen is not to be innovative or to demonstrate their individuality.
Their intrinsic driving force is not the self-discipline of artistic development, but due to industry competition and the pressure of heteronomy.
The author has interviewed many lanterns making artists, teapot making artists, Su embroidery artists, and paper fan making artists on this issue.
They all said that the competition is fierce now, and you can't get orders without making something new.
Historically, the reason why craftsmen wanted to strive for excellence and constantly innovate was mostly due to the pressure of industry competition.
Without the pressure of industry competition and the inherent laws for innovation in the modern "art system", how can traditional handicrafts have the motivation to continuously innovate and develop? Examining the history of handicraft industries such as porcelain, carpentry, clay sculpture, and stone carving, we can find that various industries have different shapes, styles, and technologies in different historical periods.
Most of the colorful periods are periods of fierce competition in the industry.
If industry competition is the driving mechanism for craftsmen to continuously innovate, then for traditional handicrafts, it is very necessary to protect, develop and revitalize an industry, and even more important than funding individual inheritors.
Because by subsidizing individual inheritors, we can only maintain their "living inheritance", and it is difficult to restore the vitality of the intangible cultural heritage itself.
However, a "living inheritance" without vitality, like Titonus in ancient Greek mythology, even if you can live forever, you cannot remain young forever.
It will only continue to age, wither, and shrink.
Selecting and funding inheritors is relatively easy to operate at the administrative level.
It is obviously very difficult to protect and revitalize an industry as a whole and may involve multi-department collaboration in publicity, education, and finance.
For industries that already have a large consumer group, it is very important for enterprises to carry out brand building.
For the traditional handicraft industry, it is necessary to create the image of traditional handicrafts and spread modern aesthetic values to the public, and then cultivate recognized consumer groups., perhaps even more necessary.
As far as many contemporary traditional handicraft industries are concerned, there is actually no shortage of creative inheritors.
The real problem is that our consumer culture has actually fallen into the cultural trap that Western society has sent us.
Mid-to-high-end consumer groups are obsessed with Western brands and lack awareness of the modern aesthetic value of traditional handicraft products, making it difficult for handmade products to generate cultural added value even if they are unique in creativity and well-crafted.
Take "Liu's Bamboo Weaving" as an example.
It is already able to develop independently among its peers.
Nearly a hundred people can only create an output value of more than 5 million yuan a year.
There are only 34 "Akiyama carpenters" in Japan, and their annual income is said to reach 1.1 billion yen.The gap between the two is difficult to reasonably explain in terms of creativity and workmanship.
The author believes that the more important factor is the issue of market recognition consumption.
Tian Zhaoyuan believes that "folk economy is essentially an identity economy." Traditional handicraft consumption belongs to the category of folk economy.
People habitually and irrationally strongly agree, and its contribution to the development of the traditional handicraft industry cannot be underestimated.
As we all know, those engaged in the traditional handicraft industry are either small and medium-sized enterprises or self-employed households.
It is difficult for them to have the strength to brand their products and spread their image and aesthetic values.
This requires the support of public service advertisements.
But unfortunately, when looking at outdoor advertisements in major media and many large and medium-sized cities, it is rare to see public service advertisements that create the image of traditional handicrafts and spread modern aesthetic values to the public.
In the practice of intangible cultural heritage protection, governments at all levels attach greater importance to the work of intangible cultural heritage entering campuses, and encourage inheritors to teach and lead apprentices among primary and secondary school students.
However, it often only pays attention to the inheritance of "technology" and neglects the modern aesthetic value education of traditional handicrafts at the level of "Tao".
In fact, in comparison, the education of "Tao" is far more important than the inheritance of "technology", because only by continuously carrying out universal education on the modern aesthetic value of traditional handicrafts can we cultivate generations of recognized consumer groups.
With a large number of recognized consumer groups, there will be fierce internal competition and vitality industries, and naturally there will be the inheritance, innovation and development of "technology".
For the traditional handicraft industry, financial support is also very necessary.
When the author interviewed Chen Baihua, the national-level inheritor of "Qinhuai Lantern", he repeatedly complained that the tax burden was too heavy and it was difficult for enterprises to expand their operations.
Since traditional handicrafts are labor-intensive industries,"social insurance premiums" are an unbearable burden for companies to expand production.
Tax exemptions and subsidies for "social security premiums" are a boost to stimulate the development of the industry and promote revitalization.
They should be encouraged at the national level.
Otherwise, local governments obsessed with GDP will not give this boost to traditional handicrafts with low GDP contribution.
All in all, to protect the intangible cultural heritage of handicrafts, we should first pay attention to the overall protection of the traditional handicraft industry and promote the development and revitalization of its industry.
Only when the entire industry has fierce competition and vitality can "self-protection" be achieved and truly Be productive.
protection.
3.
Innovation in inheritance: innovative principles for intangible cultural heritage of traditional handicrafts
Whether in modern times or in history, traditional handicrafts do not stick to rules, but constantly innovate and innovate.
When discussing the historical evolution of pottery in the Ming Dynasty, Song Yingxing said with emotion,"How can it be solid in the end!" However, in people's impressions, why do traditional handicrafts lack innovative spirit? Regarding this question, instead of asking whether traditional handicrafts truly have innovative spirit, we should reflect on what the so-called "innovative spirit" means.
In modern society,"innovation" has become an unquestionable value orientation.
In fact, the spirit of "innovation" is only widely respected in modern society.
Whether in the East or the West, in ancient societies, people respected tradition more than innovation.
Tracing back to the source, the standard of "innovation" is actually a product of the cultural spirit of modern Western romanticism.
In particular, the so-called "positive romanticism" uses concepts such as "genius" and "innovation" to fight against tradition and open up the way for individual liberation.
Since the word "innovation" is actually associated with the modern value orientation of affirming human personality, being able to innovate in a unique way means that this person is different and has a self-evident value.
Therefore, in the romantic "art world", it is not works of art, but artists with innovative spirit that attract more attention.
After the 20th century, with the rise of modernism, people's attention to "individuality" and "innovation" gradually shifted from artists to art.
Whether in the spirit of romantic culture or in the spirit of modernist culture, its "innovation" is based on the pursuit of individuality and rebellion against tradition.
This "innovative" spirit, the author calls it "betrayal innovation." China's traditional handicrafts obviously do not have this innovative spirit, and historically, they do not have the cultural traditions that breed this innovative spirit.
The author once pointed out that in modern society, traditional handicrafts have begun to identify with "beautiful art" in terms of aesthetic orientation, hoping to enter the modern "art world" as "pure art".
So, can traditional handicrafts agree with the concept of "pure art" and "betrayal innovation" and pursue personalized creation? First of all, even if traditional handicrafts pursue personalized creation, they may not be accepted by the modern "art world".
Secondly, even if it can be accepted by the modern "art world", it will come at the cost of losing its nature.
Take literati art China ink painting for example, and we also strive hard to become modern art.
Since many new ink paintings abandon tradition without deliberation and follow "betraying innovation", the inherent spirit of traditional ink paintings has in fact disappeared.
In addition to using ink as a material, these new ink paintings have no inheritance relationship with traditional ink paintings.
Not far away, traditional handicrafts should advocate development through innovation on the one hand, and on the other hand, beware of forgetting inheritance for the sake of innovation.
When talking about the innovation of traditional handicrafts as intangible cultural heritage, Kang Baocheng said,"Over-emphasizing 'original source' cannot be achieved, but unlimited development and change may make 'intangible cultural heritage' disappear, even less desirable...
The key here is an accurate grasp of the 'degree'." That is true, but it is obviously impossible to accurately grasp this "degree".
Because there is no way to determine this "degree", there is no way to evaluate whether the "degree" is exceeded.
Instead of dwelling on the issue of "degree", it is better to establish a basic principle, that is, to emphasize that traditional handicrafts should be "innovative in inheritance."
The so-called "innovation through inheritance" is actually a basic principle that traditional handicrafts have been practiced in the historical development process.
It includes three aspects.
First, never abandon the source, and never stay away from the needs of daily life for innovation.
Handicraft is different from "pure art".
Its origin is the needs of daily life rather than the principle of "self-discipline" in the "art world".
Handicraft is originally a daily object.
Therefore, no matter how innovative it is, it should not abandon its nature as a daily object and become a "pure art".
Otherwise, it will eventually lose its uniqueness and legitimacy of existence.
Taking Su embroidery as an example,"painting embroidery" with a high artistic level appeared in the Song Dynasty.
However, the daily needs of serving the beautification of costumes have always been the mainstream of Su embroidery.
It was precisely the daily needs that promoted the development of Su embroidery skills in the Ming and Qing Dynasties.
In contemporary times, almost all Su embroidery artists with outstanding skills are engaged in the production of "painting embroidery".
As they are far away from the needs of daily life, the inheritance of Su embroidery is in crisis.
Second, we must constantly innovate and surpass our skills, but aim to strive for excellence, rather than deliberately seeking innovation and differences to express our individuality.
Take the making of purple clay pots as an example.
The reason why Gu Jingzhou was able to increase the influence of purple clay pots to an unprecedented height was mainly due to his superb skills that surpassed his predecessors.
It is said that he imitated the dragon and phoenix handle pot and bamboo shoot spoon made by Chen Mingyuan in the Qing Dynasty, but was once mistaken by the Palace Museum and the Nanjing Museum as the authentic collection of Chen Mingyuan's legacy.
This shows his ability to "inherit".
Decades later, the reason why he was able to help the museum identify these imitations was his own, mainly based on the fact that the technical content of the antique pot surpassed Chen Mingyuan's.
Throughout Gu Jingzhou's artistic career, although he has countless works, there are few new and unusual works.
This is not because he lacks innovative spirit, but because he adheres to an ancient cultural concept, that is, to strive for excellence in skills and achieve perfection and beauty., is also an innovation.
Corresponding to the innovation of skills, we must constantly innovate and innovate in terms of aesthetic concepts.
The so-called "Chen" refers to aesthetic concepts and artistic forms that are not in line with the spirit of the times, while "push" does not just mean pushing away and abandoning, but "pushing", that is, pushing it to transform and constantly adapt to external changes.
Gu Jingzhou became famous for making antique pots when he was young.
He always attached great importance to the inheritance of traditional utensils, but he never adhered to the ancient shapes.
Instead, he improved the utensils with modern aesthetic awareness.
For example, the "Ziye Stone Dipper" pot has long become a classic utensil.
However, he was able to devote himself to research and launch the "Jingzhou Stone Dipper".
Through improvements in the connection of the body barrel, spout, and handle, the "gentleman in the pot" stone ladle pot "" shows dignity while being stable, and skeleton while being round ", making it more" refined, energetic and spiritual." Another example is Nanjing Yun Brocade.
It was originally a palace article that pursued grandeur and complex beauty.
This aesthetic taste was obviously difficult for modern people to accept.
Jin Wen, the national inheritor of Yun Brocade making skills, did not completely abandon tradition, but constantly changed some traditional patterns and produced a batch of simple, simple and elegant Yun Brocade products, which are said to have high market recognition.
Third, we should not distance ourselves from the inherent aesthetic psychology of the nation due to innovation.
Bless life through the auspicious meaning of art is the inherent aesthetic psychology of the Chinese nation.
The shapes, patterns, and colors of traditional handicrafts all imply an auspicious meaning.
This contains a cultural concept, that is, the aesthetics of handicrafts is not aimless or non-utilitarian, but is first to satisfy people's wishes.
With the spiritual needs of a happy daily life, innovation in handicrafts should not violate the inherent aesthetic psychology of this nation.
Cao Zhenrong, the inheritor of Qinhuai lantern production skills, said,"Making lanterns pays attention to moral meanings and should be liked, such as dog lights.
The cartoon dog style is festive and smiling, as if it is lying down to pay people New Year greetings.
The meaning is congratulations and wealth...
I have created airplane lights, but I can't make gun and bullet lights.
These meanings are unlucky." The author has seen a cloud brocade work created by Jin Wen.
The picture is three peonies and two butterflies.
The spatial division is right, and the overall color is harmonious, which is in line with modern aesthetic taste.
For this work, the interpretation of the bronze inscriptions is very different from that of the author.
He said that the peony symbolizes wealth, and the butterfly symbolizes "the octogenarian" and longevity.
Together, it means wealth and old age.
The reason why the three peonies are not designed in a symmetrical pattern is instead arranged obliquely in a line, implying "all the way." What is intriguing is that from the perspective of craftsmen, innovation in art forms such as structure and color must also be based on the inherent aesthetic psychology of the nation.
The principle of "innovation in inheritance" means the dialectical unity of "inheritance" and "innovation", which places high demands on craftsmen.
He must not only study hard and practice, be familiar with tradition, and be able to inherit, but also have certain theoretical literacy, awareness and ability to consciously innovate.
Take Gu Jingzhou as an example.
He not only has a solid foundation in traditional culture and collected, sorted and studied ancient purple sand books, but also carefully studied modern aesthetics and art, and deeply studied ceramic processes related to the purple sand industry.
He also explored and studied ancient kiln sites in Yixing area and even studied chemistry to analyze purple sand soil raw materials.
As the researchers said, the reason why Gu Jingzhou became a "purple sand master" is not just because his level of pot making is superb, but more importantly, he has a cultural cultivation and aesthetic taste that far exceeds that of ordinary craftsmen.
conclusion
From the late 19th century to the early 20th century, Western folklore circles believed that folklore was the "legacy" of pre-modern society.
In this regard, Malinowski pointedly pointed out that the concept of "legacy" contained the meaning that "cultural arrangements can continue to exist after they have lost their functions." In fact, this is not the case.
All cultural elements "must be active, functional, and effective." In this regard, the intangible cultural heritage of traditional handicrafts that belong to the category of "relics" are not just "cultural relics".
Since they can exist in modern society, they must be active and perform modern functions.
This means that it is impossible for traditional handicrafts to remain unchanged and develop, and to actively innovate based on practical needs.
Moreover, only by continuous innovation can we keep pace with the times and rely on self-reliance to achieve living inheritance.
Traditional handicrafts are different from general folk art that has been differentiated from daily life.
It still has the characteristics of the industry.
Therefore, in protection practice, we need to focus on activating the vitality of the entire industry, rather than just protecting a few inheritors.
As an intangible cultural heritage, traditional handicrafts must also be restricted by the inherent regulations of intangible cultural heritage.
In production practice, it cannot only be an expression of the creator's artistic personality and artistic concept, but must follow the basic principle of "innovation through inheritance".
Its "innovation" should be to strive for excellence and innovate without abandoning its origin and respecting the inherent aesthetic psychology of the nation, rather than betraying tradition and deliberately seeking innovation.
(The original text was published in the Journal of Yunnan Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), No.
4,2019.
The annotations are omitted and refer to the original issue for details)