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.
我必須說,兩年前什麼問題也沒有。 兩年前,我很清楚一幅肖像該長什麼樣子。 肖像就該長成這樣。 大家都是這麼想, 當時我身為義大利 文藝復興博物館館長,亦有同感。 這幅畫大概是另一種公認的肖像。 李奧納多·達文西的《抱銀鼠的女子》, 神態精緻又深情, 我特地用了"深情"這個詞。 或者還有這幅畫,或者說這些畫: 李奧納多的"在岩洞中的聖母", 當時這兩個版本將要首次在倫敦一併展出。 當時我正處於展覽籌畫的陣痛期, 完全沉浸於李奧納多的作品當中, 而且我已經沉浸了三年。 李奧納多佔據了我整個大腦。 在那三年間,他教導了我 一幅畫有多大威力。 能將你從物質世界帶到心靈的世界。 李昂納多曾說過, 他深信一個畫家的職責 是把宇宙中所有能看到的和不能看到的 都畫出來。 這是一件艱巨的工作, 但他却又成功做到了。 我覺得,他向我們展示了人類的靈魂。 他向我們展示了 我們往精神領域邁進的能耐。 去看一個我們從未見過的更加完美的宇宙, 用另一種目光去看上帝的計劃。 可以說,這就是當時 我對肖像的想法和定義。
At about that time, I started talking to Tom Campbell,
大約在那段時間 我開始和 Tom Campbell 聊天,
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)
他是大都會藝術博物館的主管, 我們談到我未來的動向。 事實上,我計劃回到過去的生活, 我以前在大英博物館裡展開的生活。 回到三維的世界, 雕塑和裝飾藝術的世界, 接管大都會博物館的歐洲雕塑及裝飾藝術部。 但那時我非常忙。 所有談話都是在一天之中 極不尋常的時刻進行的-- 而且是透過電話完成的。 最後,我接受了這工作 儘管我沒有真正去那裡看過。 我幾年前去過那裡, 但也就去過那麼一次。 當我終於能夠回到紐約的大都會博物館 視察我的新領域, 那剛好是李奧納多展覽開始的時間。 為了看歐洲的雕塑和裝飾藝術, 看看我所熟悉的 文藝復興時期之後發生的演變。 在那天,我想,我最好去參觀藝術館。 五十七間藝術館, 我相信,就像五十七種烤豆子, 我從自己的安全區—— 意大利文藝復興館開始參觀, 然後慢慢四周走動, 不時感到不知所措, 我的大腦,仍然想著 即將開放的李奧納多展覽, 然後我看見了這個東西。 我問我自己:我到底幹了什麼? 我的思維突然掉鏈, 事實上,要是當時我有任何感覺, 那感覺就是厭惡之情。 這東西完全、十足地莫名其妙, 竟然可以"愚蠢可笑"到這種程度。 然後,更糟糕的是 這玩意有兩個。 (笑) 所以,我開始想,為什麼我 會那麼討厭這件東西。 到底我的厭惡是從何而來? 嗯,太多金,太庸俗了。 你知道,活脫脫的暴發戶。 李奧纳多反對使用金來做藝術品, 所以當時我對這個極為反感。 然後它們還遍佈著小花枝 (笑) 最後,那粉紅。那該死的粉紅。 真的是異常人工的顏色。 我是說,我想像不到在自然界中 有什麼東西是這種顏色。 那模樣、那色調 這物件還有自己的芭蕾舞裙呢!(笑) 就好像衣裙上的荷邊裝飾, 那小小的金光閃爍物就在花瓶的底部。 它用一種奇怪的方式 讓我想起姪女的五歲生日派對, 那裡所有的小女孩 不是打扮成公主,就是打扮成仙女。 有一個更以仙女公主的造型前來呢! 你實在應該看看那些表情。 (笑) 然後我意識到我對這玩意有印象, 簡直跟芭比娃娃的芭蕾舞演員 如出一轍。 (笑) 然後就是上面的大象 (笑) 那些與眾不同的大象 露出牠們微細、有一點奇怪和奸詐的表情, 還有如葛麗泰·嘉寶的睫毛, 這些金黃色的獠牙等等。 我意識到這是一頭 完全和橫跨塞倫蓋提 威嚴的步操一點關係也沒有的大象。 這是一場小飛象惡夢。(笑)
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)
但一些更深邃的事情也正在發酵。 這些物件,似乎正跟 我和我倫敦的自由主義左派朋友 常常對十八世紀法國貴族 所總結出的悲慘 有異曲同工之妙。 標籤告訴我這些東西 出產於塞弗爾製造廠, 在 1750 年代末用陶瓷製造而成, 並由一個叫Jean-Claude Duplessis的設計師設計, 此人,我後來知道 是一個特別卓越的人。 但對我來說,它們可總結成 一種十八世紀 貴族十足的無用。 我和我的同事都常想 這些東西某程度總結了一個想法, 你知道的 - 難怪有大革命, 又或者,感謝主世上曾經有大革命。 真的,我們曾這麼想: 就是如果你擁有一個如此的花瓶 只會有一種可能的命運。 (笑)
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.
所以,我當時杵在那,一陣恐懼發作。 但我接受這工作並繼續觀察這些花瓶。 我非看不可,因為它們在博物館的必經之路中。 所以,無論我去哪,它們都在。 它們有這種奇怪的吸引力, 就像一場交通意外, 讓我難以控制自己不望過去, 而當我這樣做的時候,我開始想: 我們到底在看什麼? 而我開始了解到 這其實是一個很棒的設計。 這用了我一點時間。 但以那芭蕾舞裙為例, 其實這是一個會以 自己的方式跳舞的作品。 它十分輕, 但仍能奇妙地平衡, 它有著這幾種雕塑的材料, 以及事實上經過 縝密分配的色彩與鍍金, 巧妙地搭配著雕琢而出的表面-- 這其實是個傑作。 且不久後我發現這份作品 至少進了四次燒窯, 才有辦法抵達這樣的境界。 在這過程中, 有多少可能發生的意外啊? 提醒你一下,這裡還有兩個喔。 所以他必須讓兩個相稱的瓷瓶 都達到如此境界才行。 現在再來談談"無用"。 事實上,它的尾端原本是燭台。 所以你原本應該看到兩邊插上蠟燭。 想像一下燭光在那表面, 那輕微不均的粉紅、那美麗的金箔 所將造成的效果。 它應能在室內空間裡熠熠閃爍, 像小型的煙火。
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.
思及此,一串煙火 也在我腦海中綻放了。 有人提醒了我"花俏"這個字眼-- 它某種程度上精確概括了這項物件-- 事實上它和"幻想"這詞有相同根源。 而這作品也是用它自己的方式, 如同達文西的畫作, 打開了某扇門,通往另一個世界。 它是充滿想像力的作品。 若你想起背景設在東方的 十八世紀瘋狂歌劇, 若你想起華麗沙發椅, 甚至被誘以鴉片的粉紅大象, 那麼這項物件就開始有點意思了。 一言以蔽之,它代表了逃避主義。 代表著當時法國貴族 刻意追求的逃避現實風格, 只為了把自己與平凡人 區別開來。
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,這種避世主義 可不是我們現代人所想的那麼歡樂。 想到這裡 我又發覺,某方面而言 我們都是 現代主義大獲全勝之後 暴政的受害者, 因為在此主義下 各項物件的型態 和功能被認為必須相似, 使得外在裝飾 被視為十分罪惡。 看起來,這是中產階級的 價值觀打敗了貴族們。 這樣感覺沒什麼不好。 除了它逐漸開始沒收了我們的想像力。 就像二十世紀時, 許多人開始認為, 自己的信仰屬於安息日那天, 剩下的生命—— 充滿機械清洗和牙齒矯正的日子—— 都和信仰無關。 我想我們都開始做這樣的事了。 我們允許自己 在螢幕前過著夢幻人生。 無論是在漆黑戲院中, 或在房間角落的電視機前。 我們將這些瓷瓶所代表的 恆常的想像力 從日常生活中徹底移除了。 所以或許是時候我們將它奪回來。 該是時候行動了。 比如說,在倫敦 近年來出現了 這些卓越而特殊的建築。 令人聯想起科幻小說 將倫敦轉變成一座夢幻遊樂場。 儘管欣賞這些高聳建築 是一件如此驚奇的體驗。 它們依然受到了阻力。 倫敦人管它們叫"黃瓜"、"碎片"、"大哥大", 把這些奇幻飛揚的建築帶回現實的塵土 似乎大家都不希望這些令人興奮、 充滿想像的旅程出現在日常生活中似的, 我感到很幸運, 自己能遇到這個作品: (笑聲) 我在網絡上查資料時發現了它。 現在呈現在各位眼前。 不像那個粉紅大象瓷瓶, 我一看見這個就愛上它了。 事實上,我和它結了婚,把它買回家。 現在它裝飾著我的辦公室。 它是十九世紀中期出產的史塔福郡人偶, 代表了扮演莎士比亞劇中 理查三世的演員,Edmund Kean。 它是採用更高級的陶瓷所製成的, 所以以藝術史的角度而言, 我熱愛它所具備的層次感和質感。 但更重要的理由是,我愛"他"。 在我那尚未遇見 粉紅塞弗爾瓷瓶的李奧納多時期, 這想必是不可能的事吧。 我愛他那粉橘色的褲子, 以及看起來像剛梳洗完畢, 要去打仗的模樣。(笑聲) 他看起來好像也忘了帶他的劍。 我愛他那粉嫩的雙頰, 像小矮人般的活力。 就某方面來說,他像是另一個我。 他,我希望是,稍有威嚴的 但大部分是頗庸俗。(笑聲) 我也希望,他是精力充沛的 若不是因為那粉紅象塞弗爾瓷瓶, 他也不會進入我的生活。 撇開達文西不談。 我明白了這項待在我辦公室的作品, 將成為我每天旅程的一部分。 我真的希望你們,在場的所有人 若來美術館參觀 發掘並帶了藝術品回家, 能夠讓這些作品 為你們的想像中的生活增色。 謝謝, (掌聲)