| 赖德霖.从“类型”和“分期＋分类”到“分期＋分主体＋分类” ——中国建筑史写作体例问题反思[J].建筑师,2018,(2):41-45. |
| 从“类型”和“分期＋分类”到“分期＋分主体＋分类” ——中国建筑史写作体例问题反思 |
| Typological Study, Dynastic Chronology, and Patronage:Rethinking the Narrative Format of Chinese Architectural History |
| |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 中国建筑史、体例、分类、分期、分主体 |
| 英文关键词: History of Chinese Architecture, Narrative Format, Typological Study, Dynastic Chronology, Patronage |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 741 |
| 全文下载次数: 0 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目前中国建筑通史著作体例多为以时代分期为经，以分类为纬的“分期+分类综合体”。作者认为，虽然它有助于呈现不同类型建筑的历史演变，但主要缺点是将建筑物从历史上不同层级的营建体系的整体中剥离，抹杀了这些建筑所体现的主体意识。作者主张在现有的通史叙述中增加对营建活动主体的区分，在中国帝国、皇权、地方行政、宗教社会、民间社会等不同层级别以及汉族与边疆民族等不同文化的原境中审视建筑。深入探讨主体赞助人对于营建活动的影响，有助于将有关类型、技术和艺术的专业讨论与政治史、社会史、经济史和文化史更紧密地结合。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| The most dominant format in survey books on Chinese architectural history combines typological study with dynastic chronology. Although it is effective in delineating the evolution of various building types throughout history, it often causes separation between building constructions and their patrons in historical narratives. In traditional China, the state and the imperial family, provincial governments, religious societies, civil societies, ethnic groups, and individuals formed patrons of different classes and cultures. Accounting for them in Chinese architectural history writings can help bring the discussions of political, cultural, and socioeconomic history into the study of architecture. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
