Two years ago, I have to say there was no problem. Two years ago, I knew exactly what an icon looked like. It looks like this. Everybody's icon, but also the default position of a curator of Italian Renaissance paintings, which I was then. And in a way, this is also another default selection. Leonardo da Vinci's exquisitely soulful image of the "Lady with an Ermine." And I use that word, soulful, deliberately. Or then there's this, or rather these: the two versions of Leonardo's "Virgin of the Rocks" that were about to come together in London for the very first time. In the exhibition that I was then in the absolute throes of organizing. I was literally up to my eyes in Leonardo, and I had been for three years. So, he was occupying every part of my brain. Leonardo had taught me, during that three years, about what a picture can do. About taking you from your own material world into a spiritual world. He said, actually, that he believed the job of the painter was to paint everything that was visible and invisible in the universe. That's a huge task. And yet, somehow he achieves it. He shows us, I think, the human soul. He shows us the capacity of ourselves to move into a spiritual realm. To see a vision of the universe that's more perfect than our own. To see God's own plan, in some sense. So this, in a sense, was really what I believed an icon was.
两年前,我得说一切都很正常。 两年前,我很清楚地知道偶像长什么样。 就长这样的。 这是所有人的偶像,包括我在内 当时我还是意大利文艺复兴博物馆的馆长。 从某种角度来说,选择这幅画也是如此。 莱昂纳多·达·芬奇细腻灵动的画作: “抱银鼠的女子”(‘Lady with an Ermine’) 我说“灵动”,是特意这么说的。 再或者是这幅,应该说是这两幅: 达·芬奇“岩间圣母”(‘Virgin of the Rocks’)的两个版本 当时在伦敦两幅画第一次一起展出。 那时我正处在筹备展览的最后阶段。 我真真切切地在解读达芬奇, 持续了三年。 所以,我当时无时无刻不在想他。 在那三年中,达·芬奇教会了我, 一幅画的力量。 它带领你脱离物质世界并进入一个精神世界。 实际上他说他相信画家的工作 是要去描绘宇宙中一切可见以及不可见的事物。 这可是任重道远。然而,他做到了。 我想,他向我们展示了,人类的灵魂。 也展示了我们自身具备的 能进入精神王国的能力, 能够目睹比我们自身更完美的宇宙景象。 从某种意义上来说,看见上帝的计划。 所以,从这个层面上来说,我确信“偶像”就是这样的。
At about that time, I started talking to Tom Campbell,
大概在那时,我开始与汤姆·坎伯交谈,
director here of the Metropolitan Museum, about what my next move might be. The move, in fact, back to an earlier life, one I'd begun at the British Museum, back to the world of three dimensions -- of sculpture and of decorative arts -- to take over the department of European sculpture and decorative arts, here at the Met. But it was an incredibly busy time. All the conversations were done at very peculiar times of the day -- over the phone. In the end, I accepted the job without actually having been here. Again, I'd been there a couple of years before, but on that particular visit. So, it was just before the time that the Leonardo show was due to open when I finally made it back to the Met, to New York, to see my new domain. To see what European sculpture and decorative arts looked like, beyond those Renaissance collections with which I was so already familiar. And I thought, on that very first day, I better tour the galleries. Fifty-seven of these galleries -- like 57 varieties of baked beans, I believe. I walked through and I started in my comfort zone in the Italian Renaissance. And then I moved gradually around, feeling a little lost sometimes. My head, also still full of the Leonardo exhibition that was about to open, and I came across this. And I thought to myself: What the hell have I done? There was absolutely no connection in my mind at all and, in fact, if there was any emotion going on, it was a kind of repulsion. This object felt utterly and completely alien. Silly at a level that I hadn't yet understood silliness to be. And then it was made worse -- there were two of them. (Laughter) So, I started thinking about why it was, in fact, that I disliked this object so much. What was the anatomy of my distaste? Well, so much gold, so vulgar. You know, so nouveau riche, frankly. Leonardo himself had preached against the use of gold, so it was absolutely anathema at that moment. And then there's little pretty sprigs of flowers everywhere. (Laughter) And finally, that pink. That damned pink. It's such an extraordinarily artificial color. I mean, it's a color that I can't think of anything that you actually see in nature, that looks that shade. The object even has its own tutu. (Laughter) This little flouncy, spangly, bottomy bit that sits at the bottom of the vase. It reminded me, in an odd kind of way, of my niece's fifth birthday party. Where all the little girls would come either as a princess or a fairy. There was one who would come as a fairy princess. You should have seen the looks. (Laughter) And I realize that this object was in my mind, born from the same mind, from the same womb, practically, as Barbie Ballerina. (Laughter) And then there's the elephants. (Laughter) Those extraordinary elephants with their little, sort of strange, sinister expressions and Greta Garbo eyelashes, with these golden tusks and so on. I realized this was an elephant that had absolutely nothing to do with a majestic march across the Serengeti. It was a Dumbo nightmare. (Laughter)
也就是这里的大都会博物馆的主管, 关于我下一步该怎么做的相关事宜。 下一步,实际上,是回到早些时候 回到我刚在大英博物馆工作的时候, 回到三维的世界—— 回到雕塑与装饰艺术的世界, 去接管大都会艺术博物馆的 欧洲雕塑与装饰艺术系别。 那段时间真是出奇的忙。 那天花了各种各样的时间段谈完了话, 而且还是通过电话。 最后,我接受了这项工作, 但其实人并没来。 我除了几年前来过这里一次, 就再没有来过。 因此,就在达·芬奇的展览将要开幕前 我终于来到了纽约的大都会博物馆, 来看看我的新领域, 超越我熟悉的意大利文艺复兴时期的收藏, 看看欧洲雕塑与装饰艺术是什么样的。 就在第一天的时候,我想最好还是参观参观。 五十七个画廊—— 就像五十七种不同的烘豆,我觉得。 我从熟悉的意大利文艺复兴的领域 步行穿过这些画廊。 然后,逐渐漫步到另一边, 有时会觉得有点迷惑。 我的脑海仍然被即将开幕的 达·芬奇的展览所占据着,然后,我看到了这个。 接着我对自己说我就想:“我究竟在干嘛呢?” 这东西在我看来绝对与这个领域没有一点联系, 而且,如果我对它有什么情绪的话, 就只能是一种反感。 这个物件给人的感觉完全是完全陌生的。 前所未有的古怪。 但是问题似乎更糟了—— 两个这样的展品。 (笑声) 因此,我开始思考为什么 我如此讨厌这个展品。 我的厌恶情绪的根源是什么? 嗯,太多的金色了,俗辣辣的俗。 你们懂的,坦白地说,就是暴发户。 达·芬奇自己就很反对对于金色的运用, 所以当时这对我来说是个很让人讨厌的东西。 而且,上面都是娇小可爱的小花枝。(笑声) 最后一点,粉色。作死的粉色。 完完全全人工制造的颜色。 我的意思是,这种暗暗的色调 是绝对不可能在自然界看到的。 这个展品甚至有芭蕾短裙。(笑声) 就是这种位于花瓶底部的 小褶边和亮片。 它以一种古怪的方式使我想起了 我侄女五岁的生日派对。 所有的小女孩都会装扮成公主或仙女过来。 有个姑娘装扮成了童话里的公主。 你们应该已经知道那是什么样儿了。 (笑声) 我意识到,对我来说这件展品 是基本类似于 芭比娃娃打扮成芭蕾舞演员。(笑声) 之后,这些大象。(笑声) 这些非同一般的大象 露出些许奇怪阴险的表情 有着葛丽泰·嘉宝样的睫毛以及金象牙等等。 我意识到这只象与塞伦盖蒂的 “宏伟行军”绝对没有半毛钱关系。 这是小飞象的噩梦版。(笑声)
But something more profound was happening as well. These objects, it seemed to me, were quintessentially the kind that I and my liberal left friends in London had always seen as summing up something deplorable about the French aristocracy in the 18th century. The label had told me that these pieces were made by the Sèvres Manufactory, made of porcelain in the late 1750s, and designed by a designer called Jean-Claude Duplessis, actually somebody of extraordinary distinction as I later learned. But for me, they summed up a kind of, that sort of sheer uselessness of the aristocracy in the 18th century. I and my colleagues had always thought that these objects, in way, summed up the idea of, you know -- no wonder there was a revolution. Or, indeed, thank God there was a revolution. There was a sort of idea really, that, if you owned a vase like this, then there was really only one fate possible. (Laughter)
但是我脑海中也蹦出了更深刻的东西。 对我来说,似乎这些展品, 是那种典型的我和我在 伦敦的自由主义左派朋友 常看到的展品类型 当我们总结十八世纪 凄惨的法国贵族的时候。 展品上的标签告诉我这些作品 是在塞夫勒厂(Sèvres Manufactory)制作的, 材质是瓷,年代在制作于十八世纪五十年代后期, 它的设计师名叫让-克洛德·杜普蕾西丝(Jean-Claude Duplessis), 但后来据我了解, 他是一位特立独行的设计师。 但对我来说,他们似乎在总结, 十八世纪的贵族的 纯粹的无价值性。 我和我的同事以前经常认为 这些展品,从某种角度来说,总结了 你们懂的--怪不得后来爆发了一场革命。 或确切些说,感谢上帝,这场革命爆发了。 这种观点认为, 如果你有一个像这样的花瓶, 命运可能就只有一种了。 (笑声)
So, there I was -- in a sort of paroxysm of horror. But I took the job and I went on looking at these vases. I sort of had to because they're on a through route in the Met. So, almost anywhere I went, there they were. They had this kind of odd sort of fascination, like a car accident. Where I couldn't stop looking. And as I did so, I started thinking: Well, what are we actually looking at here? And what I started with was understanding this as really a supreme piece of design. It took me a little time. But, that tutu for example -- actually, this is a piece that does dance in its own way. It has an extraordinary lightness and yet, it is also amazing balanced. It has these kinds of sculptural ingredients. And then the play between -- actually really quite carefully disposed color and gilding, and the sculptural surface, is really rather remarkable. And then I realized that this piece went into the kiln four times, at least four times in order to arrive at this. How many moments for accident can you think of that could have happened to this piece? And then remember, not just one, but two. So he's having to arrive at two exactly matched vases of this kind. And then this question of uselessness. Well actually, the end of the trunks were originally candle holders. So what you would have had were candles on either side. Imagine that effect of candlelight on that surface. On the slightly uneven pink, on the beautiful gold. It would have glittered in an interior, a little like a little firework.
因此,我陷入了一种终极恐慌中。 但是,我仍然接受了这项工作, 并继续研究这些花瓶。 其实不得不看,因为它们就摆放在 博物馆的必经之路上。 所以,我在哪儿,都能看到它们。 它们有这种奇怪的魅力, 就跟车祸现场一样。 叫我忍不住的看。 我反复地观察,然后开始思考: 嗯,我们到底在观察什么呢? 这种思考的开端就是去真正地 把这个展品当作优秀的设计来理解。 这花了我一些时间。 比如,这里的“芭蕾短裙”—— 事实上,它是在用自己的方式“舞蹈”。 看看它卓越的亮度 以及令人称奇的平衡力。 它拥有许多雕刻所需的组成。 还有,颜色与镀金 之间的完美结合,以及 与雕塑表面之间的结合, 无不精湛。 然后我意识到这个花瓶 入过四次窑,至少四次 才能达到这个水准。 你能想象花瓶在烧制过程中 可能会出现多少意外吗? 而且请记住,不是只有一个,而是两个。 所以设计师得做两个完全达到了 这种水准的花瓶。 然后,回到“无价值”的问题上。 其实,象鼻的末端是一个小烛台。 所以可以在两边各放一支蜡烛。 想象一下烛光映照在这个表面的效果。 映照在那稍稍不均匀的粉色上,那美丽的金色上。 它会在在室内闪闪发光, 就像迷你的烟火。
And at that point, actually, a firework went off in my brain. Somebody reminded me that, that word 'fancy' -- which in a sense for me, encapsulated this object -- actually comes from the same root as the word 'fantasy.' And that what this object was just as much in a way, in its own way, as a Leonardo da Vinci painting, is a portal to somewhere else. This is an object of the imagination. If you think about the mad 18th-century operas of the time -- set in the Orient. If you think about divans and perhaps even opium-induced visions of pink elephants, then at that point, this object starts to make sense. This is an object which is all about escapism. It's about an escapism that happens -- that the aristocracy in France sought very deliberately to distinguish themselves from ordinary people.
说到这里,事实上, 我脑海中已经有了烟火盛放的画面。 有人提醒我,用“花哨”(‘fancy’)这个词—— 来形容这个花瓶,对我来说 这和和“幻想”(‘fantasy’)一词是同源的。 而且,这件展品其实只是 在用自己的方式,就像达·芬奇的画作一样, 成为通往另一个世界的入口。 这是一件充满想象的艺术品。 如果你去想想18世纪歌剧的疯狂— 来自东方的作品, 以及室内的装潢和甚至是鸦片导致的 粉色大象的幻觉, 从这个角度来讲,这个作品就说得通了。 这件作品描述了一种空想。 这种空想成为了现实—— 法国贵族 有意 要把他们自己同寻常百姓区别开来。
It's not an escapism that we feel particularly happy with today, however. And again, going on thinking about this, I realize that in a way we're all victims of a certain kind of tyranny of the triumph of modernism whereby form and function in an object have to follow one another, or are deemed to do so. And the extraneous ornament is seen as really, essentially, criminal. It's a triumph, in a way, of bourgeois values rather than aristocratic ones. And that seems fine. Except for the fact that it becomes a kind of sequestration of imagination. So just as in the 20th century, so many people had the idea that their faith took place on the Sabbath day, and the rest of their lives -- their lives of washing machines and orthodontics -- took place on another day. Then, I think we've started doing the same. We've allowed ourselves to lead our fantasy lives in front of screens. In the dark of the cinema, with the television in the corner of the room. We've eliminated, in a sense, that constant of the imagination that these vases represented in people's lives. So maybe it's time we got this back a little. I think it's beginning to happen. In London, for example, with these extraordinary buildings that have been appearing over the last few years. Redolent, in a sense, of science fiction, turning London into a kind of fantasy playground. It's actually amazing to look out of a high building nowadays there. But even then, there's a resistance. London has called these buildings the Gherkin, the Shard, the Walkie Talkie -- bringing these soaring buildings down to Earth. There's an idea that we don't want these anxious-making, imaginative journeys to happen in our daily lives. I feel lucky in a way, I've encountered this object. (Laughter) I found him on the Internet when I was looking up a reference. And there he was. And unlike the pink elephant vase, this was a kind of love at first sight. In fact, reader, I married him. I bought him. And he now adorns my office. He's a Staffordshire figure made in the middle of the 19th century. He represents the actor, Edmund Kean, playing Shakespeare's Richard III. And it's based, actually, on a more elevated piece of porcelain. So I loved, on an art historical level, I loved that layered quality that he has. But more than that, I love him. In a way that I think would have been impossible without the pink Sèvres vase in my Leonardo days. I love his orange and pink breeches. I love the fact that he seems to be going off to war, having just finished the washing up. (Laughter) He seems also to have forgotten his sword. I love his pink little cheeks, his munchkin energy. In a way, he's become my sort of alter ego. He's, I hope, a little bit dignified, but mostly rather vulgar. (Laughter) And energetic, I hope, too. I let him into my life because the Sèvres pink elephant vase allowed me to do so. And before that Leonardo, I understood that this object could become part of a journey for me every day, sitting in my office. I really hope that others, all of you, visiting objects in the museum, and taking them home and finding them for yourselves, will allow those objects to flourish in your imaginative lives. Thank you very much. (Applause)
然而,这并不是那种 现如今会令人愉悦的空想。 我继续思考着, 然后意识到,在某种意义上,我们都是 胜利的现代主义中 暴政的受害者, 也就是说,一件物品的构造与功能 必须相互参照,或者人们是这样想的。 而无用的装饰被从根本上视为是 一种真正的犯罪。 这与其说是贵族的胜利, 还不如说是资产阶级的胜利。 听上去似乎行得通, 除了,想象力的匮乏是不争的事实以外。 因此,就像在20世纪一样,那么多的人 认为他们的信仰生活 应在安息日进行, 除此以外的生活—— 洗衣服看牙医的生活—— 则改日进行。 我觉得我们现在做的事情如出一辙。 我们允许自己 将幻想生活局限在电视屏幕前。 在黑暗的电影院中,在角落里的电视机前。 从某种意义上说,我们已经扼杀了 这些花瓶所展示的人们生活中的想象力。 因此,也许我们是时候“怀怀旧”了。 我认为这已经开始发生了。 比如在伦敦, 像这样非同一般的建筑物 在过去的几年中一直在新建。 它们从某种角度上使人想到科幻小说, 并把伦敦变成了一块幻想之地。 如今从高层建筑向外眺望是非常令人着迷的。 但即使这样,阻力却仍然存在。 伦敦人把这些建筑叫做“小黄瓜”、“水晶宫”、“对讲机”—— 把这些冲向云霄的建筑拉回到了现实。 有人认为是我们本身不想 在生活中碰见这些使人焦虑、富于想象力的过程。 从某种角度来说,我是幸运的。 我遇上了这个作品。 (笑声) 我在网上寻找参考材料的时候找到了他。 就是这个。 不同于粉色大象花瓶, 我第一眼看到就觉得很有爱。 事实上,我拥有了他,我买下来了。 现在是我办公室里的装饰品。 他是一个19世纪中叶制作的 斯塔福郡塑像(Staffordshire figure)。 展示了男演员埃德蒙·基恩 饰演莎士比亚的理查三世的场景。 而且它的材质是一种更高级的瓷。 所以我喜欢它,从艺术史的层面上来说, 喜欢它极富层次感的品质。 但更重要的是,我喜欢他本身。 从某种角度来说,如果在研究达芬奇的日子里没有见到过粉色花瓶 这就是绝对不可能发生的事了。 我喜欢他橙粉相间的短裤。 我喜欢他那种似乎刚刚打扮整洁 然后要去上战场的样子。(笑声) 他好像还忘了他的剑。 我喜欢他粉色的双颊,还有充沛的精力。 从某种角度来说,他已经成为了另一个我。 他还是有点威严的, 但还是粗俗占大部分。(笑声) 我也希望他活力充沛。 因为那只粉色大象,我让他进入了我的生活。 在达芬奇多之前, 我明白这件作品会成为 我人生旅程的一部分, 就这么坐在办公室里。 我真诚地希望其他人,在座的各位, 在博物馆参观展品的时候, 还有在把它们带回家,抑或 是在寻找它们的时候 能够跟随着这些展品让想象力源源不断地注入进生命。 非常感谢。 (掌声)