Chongwei huashan tu xu 重爲華山圖序

Chongwei huashan tu xu 重爲華山圖序 is the preface of an album of landscape paintings of Mount Huashan produced by Wang Lü 王履 (b. 1332), courtesy name Dao‘an 安道, style Jisou 畸叟 or Baodu Laoren 抱獨老人, from Kunshan 崑山, Jiangsu. He was a physician and painter. In 1383, he travelled to the region of Mt. Huashan. Deeply impressed by the majestic landscape, he compiled an album of 65 paintings, Huashan tuce 華山圖册. He also wrote two medical books, Baibing mingxuan 百病銘玄, and Yi yuntong 醫韻統. His collected writings are called Shuohui ji 朔洄集. 《重爲華山圖序》是明代初期一篇重要的繪畫論著。王履首先分析了繪畫中「意」和「形」的關係，針對宋元以來一部分畫家忽視具體藝術形象刻畫與塑造的傾向，强調「畫雖狀形，主乎意，意不足謂之非形可也。雖然，意在形，舍形所求意?故得其形者，意溢乎形，失其形者形乎哉!」 其次，對於「轉摹」的研習方法提出了自己的看法，指出：「古之人之名世，果得於暗中摸索耶?彼務於轉摹者，多以紙素之識是足，而不之外，故愈遠愈，形尚失之，况意?」進一步確立了「形」在繪畫中的地位與功能。 "Preface to the Repainting of Mount Hua" (Chong Wei Huashan Tu Xu) is an important treatise on painting from the early Ming dynasty. Wang Lü begins by analyzing the relationship between idea (yi) and form (xing) in painting. In response to certain painters since the Song and Yuan dynasties who tended to neglect the concrete depiction and shaping of artistic images, he emphasizes: “Although painting represents form, it is governed by idea. Yet to lack idea does not mean that form alone suffices. Even so, idea resides within form—how can one seek idea apart from form? Therefore, those who capture the form allow idea to overflow through form; those who miss the form—what idea remains in such form?” Next, Wang Lü presents his view on the method of “copying and tracing” (zhuanmo). He writes: “Did the masters of old achieve greatness merely by groping in the dark? Those who devote themselves to copying often think that acquaintance with paper and ink is sufficient, and disregard what lies beyond. Thus, the farther they go, the more they stray—not only failing in form, but how much more in idea!” In this way, Wang Lü further affirms the fundamental role and function of form in painting. 第三，作爲本篇論著的精華，是王履根據自己創作《華山圖册》的體會對畫理、畫法闡述了自己的見解。「苟非識華山之形，我其能圖耶?既圖矣，意猶未滿，由是存乎靜室，存乎行路，存乎床枕，存乎飲食，存乎外物，存乎聽音，存乎應接之隙，存乎文章之中。一日燕居，聞鼓吹過門，怵然而作曰：『得之矣夫。』遂麾舊而重圖之。斯時也，但知法在華山，竟不知平日之所謂家數者何在。」面對山川自然，心悟造化靈秀，則一切法度、規則都不能承擔起表現自然、表達心緒的重任。由於這種深切的體驗來自他的創作實踐，因此，引發了他對前人延傳下來的各種程式規範、筆墨法則的重新認識與評判：「夫家數因人而立名，既因於人，吾獨非人乎?夫憲章乎既往之迹者謂之宗，宗也者從也，其一於從而止乎?可從，從，從也；可違，違，亦從也。違果爲從乎?時當違，理可違，吾斯違矣。吾雖違，理其違哉!時當從，理可從，吾斯從矣。從其在我乎?亦理是從而已焉耳。」由此可以見王履的藝術個性既源於個人的品性，更源於他對造化自然和繪畫形色的深刻認識，尤其是個人面對自然時的心靈之悟。 hird, the essence of this treatise lies in Wang Lü’s personal insights on painting theory and technique, drawn from his experience creating The Album of Mount Hua (Huashan Tuce). He writes: “If I had not understood the form of Mount Hua, how could I have painted it? And having painted it, yet still feeling that the idea was not fully expressed, I began to contemplate it—while in my quiet studio, on the road, at my bedside, during meals, in external things, while listening to sounds, in moments between engagements, even amidst writing. One day, while resting at home, I heard the sound of flutes and drums passing by the door and was suddenly stirred. I exclaimed: ‘Now I have it!’ So I cast aside the old painting and redid it. In that moment, I knew only that the method lay in Mount Hua itself—I no longer cared for the so-called orthodox styles handed down from tradition.” Faced with the natural landscape and inspired by the spiritual essence of creation, he realized that conventional rules and methods were inadequate for capturing nature or conveying personal feeling. This profound experience, born of his own artistic practice, led Wang Lü to reexamine and critically assess the formulas, norms, and brushwork principles inherited from earlier painters: “The orthodox schools (jiashu) gained their names through individual artists. Since they came from people, am I not also a person? To follow the precedents of the past is called adhering to tradition. But to follow—is it to follow only and stop there? If it is right to follow, then follow. If it is right to depart, then depart—and this too is a form of following. Is not deviation itself a kind of following? When it is the right time to depart, and the reasoning is sound, then I will depart. Though I depart, is the principle itself truly transgressed? When it is time to follow, and the reasoning is sound, then I will follow. Is following truly up to me? I merely follow what is in accord with principle.” From this we see that Wang Lü’s artistic individuality stemmed not only from personal temperament, but more importantly from his deep understanding of nature (zàohuà) and of painting’s relation to form and color—especially the spiritual insight awakened when one directly faces the natural world. 顯然王履的繪畫觀不是「寫意」的，也不是「寫實」的，因而，他對前人法度的繼承是有選擇的，而選擇的標準就是筆墨形象必須合於自然造化，因而，他説：「謂吾有宗歟?不拘拘於專門之固守；謂吾無宗歟?又不遠於前人之軌轍。然則余也，其蓋處夫宗與不宗之間乎?且夫山之爲山也，不一其狀，……一不可以名命，此豈非變之變焉者乎?彼既出於變之變，吾可以常之常者待之哉?吾故不得不去故而就新也」。王履的變法前軌，在於自然山川的「不一其狀」，但繪畫又不是自然物形的翻版，因此，寓意於形，前人的遺産仍是可次假籍的。關鍵在於自出機軸。因而，在結尾處，王履又説：「余也安敢故背前人，然不能不立於前人之外。俗情喜同不喜異，藏諸家，或偶見焉，以爲乖於諸體也，怪問何師?余應之曰：『吾師心，心師目，目師華山。』」 Evidently, Wang Lü’s view of painting is neither purely xieyi (expressive freehand) nor strictly xieshi (realistic representation). As such, his inheritance of artistic rules from predecessors is selective. His criterion for selection is clear: the forms created by brush and ink must accord with the transformations of nature. He thus writes: “Do I have a tradition (zong)? I do not stubbornly cling to any one particular school. Do I have no tradition? I do not stray far from the tracks of the ancients. Then might I reside somewhere between having and not having a tradition?” He continues: “Mountains, in their mountain-ness, are not uniform in form... They cannot be described with a single name. Is this not the transformation within transformation (bian zhi bian)? Since nature produces such endless variation, how could I respond with fixed and unchanging methods? Therefore, I must abandon the old and approach the new.” Wang Lü’s innovation begins with the understanding that natural mountains do not conform to one single form, but he also recognizes that painting is not a mere replication of nature’s physical appearance. Hence, meaning must be embedded within form, and while the legacy of past masters can still serve as valuable reference, the key lies in originality and personal insight. As he concludes: “How dare I intentionally turn my back on the ancients? Yet I cannot help but stand apart from them. The common eye delights in sameness and dislikes difference. Should one of my works be accidentally seen among collections, it may appear out of step with established styles. People might ask: ‘Whose school is this from?’ I reply: My teacher is the heart, the heart learns from the eye, and the eye learns from Mount Hua.” 王履的這篇序文，雖不足千字，卻對繪畫的意與形、造化與心源、造化與古人、心源與古人三者之間的相互關係作了明晰而透徹的論述，並且提出了獨具個性的見解。這篇序文不僅在明初具有發前人未及之見的重要的價值，而且就整個繪畫理論的歷史演變而言亦占有重要一席。所以，在明清兩代，王履「去故就新」「吾師心，心師目，目師華山」的見解是經常被引用、論及的繪畫觀之一。 Although Wang Lü’s preface is less than a thousand characters in length, it presents a clear and penetrating discussion of the interrelationships between idea and form, nature and the mind, nature and the ancients, and the mind and the ancients in painting. He offers original and highly personal insights. This preface is not only of significant value in the early Ming period for advancing ideas not yet fully explored by earlier thinkers, but also holds an important place in the broader historical evolution of painting theory. Thus, throughout the Ming and Qing dynasties, Wang Lü’s artistic view—such as “abandoning the old and embracing the new,” and “my teacher is the heart, the heart learns from the eye, and the eye learns from Mount Hua”—was frequently quoted and discussed as one of the key perspectives in painting theory. 易見的《序》文版本有俞劍華編《中國畫論類編》由中國古典藝術出版社出版；中華書局《中國美學史資料選編·下册》收入此文。