An inkstone, a piece of polished stone no bigger than an outstretched hand, is an instrument for grinding ink, a collectible object of art, a token of exchange between friends or sovereign states, and an inscriptional surface on which texts and images are carved and reproduced. As such the inkstone is entangled with the production of elite masculinity and the culture of wen (culture, literature, civility) in China, Korea, and Japan for over a millennium. Curiously, this ubiquitous object in East Asia is virtually unknown in Europe and America.
The Social Life of Inkstones introduces its hidden history and cultural significance to scholars and collectors and in so doing, writes the stonecutters and artisans into history. Each of the five chapters is set in a specific place in disparate parts of the empire: the imperial workshops in the Forbidden City, the Duan quarries in Guangdong, inkstonecarving workshops in Suzhou and elsewhere in the south, and collectors’ homes in Fujian. Taken together, they trace the trajectories of the inkstone between court and society, and through the course of its entire social life. In bringing to life the people involved in making, using, collecting, and writing about the inkstone, this study shows the powerful emotional and technical investments that such a small object engendered.
This first book-length study of inkstones focuses on a group of inkstone carvers and collectors, highlighting the work of Gu Erniang, a woman transitioned the artistry of inkstone-making to modernity between the 1680s and 1730s. The sophistication of these artisans and the craft practice of the scholars associated with them announced a new social order in which the age-old hierarchy of head over hand no longer predominated.
##一些撕标签的过程,梳理社会肌理。
评分##craft of wen, materiality of body. 在反思一点,对形式分析的利用可以导向风格序列的建立(方闻)、可以揭示“愉悦感”的建构方式(乔迅)、或是展现宗教思想与实践的转向(金珍我)。但在作者这里,对形式的描述与感官的唤起缺乏更为明确的锚点:个人很喜欢她对刘源造砚的分析,很好地展现出清初宫廷对机巧的崇尚,但在顾二娘相关的分析中,由于现存材料极度稀薄,精细的分析也只能沦作散兵游勇。作者似乎想要通过对砚台的仔细观察与描述来展现出这一时期人们对物质性及技艺的关注,进而试图为艾尔曼的“理学到朴学”演进找到更早的潜流。然而,小小的砚台是否能直接承受如此之重的转向——如何弥合感官与思想间的鸿沟,对古代身体经验的当代重构是否也成为了一种霸权?观察与体验很重要,但这仅仅是第一步。
评分##资料有意思,但是没能很好组织起来,最后也没有什么结论。
评分##Intro. & Conclusion,中间部分待看詹镇鹏译本。和薛凤的《工开万物》接起来会很好玩,高认为Fujian groups这群“士-匠人”对待技术实作的态度比宋应星更激进:宋只是借技术实作阐述自己的政治理念和哲学观(更像是一种宇宙观吧),他们则是通过在体化占领了匠人技艺(刻砚台)。继而她提到这也许和艾尔曼“从理学到朴学”里提到乾嘉考证学派的兴起有关。这三本书因此联动起来。这样的观点也展现了她一贯的想象力。“文之艺”这一知识型的提法也有很意思,再次搅乱诸多二元论,比如士人/匠人,知/行,道/器,以及男/女——高明显的个人标记。但不得不说,结论部分想说得太多,确实需要很多研究“to substantiate it”。对艾约博的引用有错误,他说的技能不是既在体又社会联结。
评分##Intro. & Conclusion,中间部分待看詹镇鹏译本。和薛凤的《工开万物》接起来会很好玩,高认为Fujian groups这群“士-匠人”对待技术实作的态度比宋应星更激进:宋只是借技术实作阐述自己的政治理念和哲学观(更像是一种宇宙观吧),他们则是通过在体化占领了匠人技艺(刻砚台)。继而她提到这也许和艾尔曼“从理学到朴学”里提到乾嘉考证学派的兴起有关。这三本书因此联动起来。这样的观点也展现了她一贯的想象力。“文之艺”这一知识型的提法也有很意思,再次搅乱诸多二元论,比如士人/匠人,知/行,道/器,以及男/女——高明显的个人标记。但不得不说,结论部分想说得太多,确实需要很多研究“to substantiate it”。对艾约博的引用有错误,他说的技能不是既在体又社会联结。
评分##纸张问题,看书太晃眼,不是一次美好的读书体验;作者在名噪天下以后的著作,虽时有洞见,但是一本书塞进去太多的arguments, 从material empire 到scholar status再到gender..
评分中文譯本埋頭苦幹中,並將由原作者高彥頤親自操刀修訂,敬請期待!
评分##希望快出中文版
评分##纸张问题,看书太晃眼,不是一次美好的读书体验;作者在名噪天下以后的著作,虽时有洞见,但是一本书塞进去太多的arguments, 从material empire 到scholar status再到gender..
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.tinynews.org All Rights Reserved. 静思书屋 版权所有