Vardan Azatyan, F. Schwartz, T. Clark, Sami R. Khatib, M. Šuvaković, Ursula Frohne
Abstract Consider the nature and function of art and art historical scholarship in the present: Is there still a line—even fine or porous—securing the fragile autonomy of the arts and humanities from commodification in late capitalism? Can art still serve as a negative and critical mirror for reality under the seemingly complete commodification and technological mediation of social life? Is there any real need for art and art historical scholarship even to exist today? Can the arts and humanities serve an emancipatory social agenda, and, if so, how? What role might the humanist ideals once shared by liberals and communists play in the reformulation of art and scholarship today?
{"title":"Art and Scholarship in Moments of Historical Danger","authors":"Vardan Azatyan, F. Schwartz, T. Clark, Sami R. Khatib, M. Šuvaković, Ursula Frohne","doi":"10.1162/artm_a_00304","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00304","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Consider the nature and function of art and art historical scholarship in the present: Is there still a line—even fine or porous—securing the fragile autonomy of the arts and humanities from commodification in late capitalism? Can art still serve as a negative and critical mirror for reality under the seemingly complete commodification and technological mediation of social life? Is there any real need for art and art historical scholarship even to exist today? Can the arts and humanities serve an emancipatory social agenda, and, if so, how? What role might the humanist ideals once shared by liberals and communists play in the reformulation of art and scholarship today?","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"159-190"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41939199","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A. Appadurai, Johanna K. Bockman, Nathalie Heinich, M. Konings, Leigh Claire La Berge, G. Lovink, I. S. Prado, W. Thayer
Abstract Apart from the longstanding and much-debated problem of art's commodification, how does neoliberalism transform and determine the conditions of artistic practice? Further, if neoliberalism is a substantially distinct stage in the history of capitalism, and not merely its intensification, what are the implications of this new condition for the practice and criticism of contemporary art? What does it mean to practice and theorize art, to be an artist or critic, under neoliberalism? Drawing on the central topic of this issue, is aesthetic, artistic, or political radicality in art still possible under the neoliberal condition? Can, or should, artistic practice constitute a significant site of resistance? Conversely, is the contemporary art world a paradigmatic case of, and even a model for, neoliberal capitalism?
{"title":"Art under Neoliberalism","authors":"A. Appadurai, Johanna K. Bockman, Nathalie Heinich, M. Konings, Leigh Claire La Berge, G. Lovink, I. S. Prado, W. Thayer","doi":"10.1162/artm_a_00303","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00303","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Apart from the longstanding and much-debated problem of art's commodification, how does neoliberalism transform and determine the conditions of artistic practice? Further, if neoliberalism is a substantially distinct stage in the history of capitalism, and not merely its intensification, what are the implications of this new condition for the practice and criticism of contemporary art? What does it mean to practice and theorize art, to be an artist or critic, under neoliberalism? Drawing on the central topic of this issue, is aesthetic, artistic, or political radicality in art still possible under the neoliberal condition? Can, or should, artistic practice constitute a significant site of resistance? Conversely, is the contemporary art world a paradigmatic case of, and even a model for, neoliberal capitalism?","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"126-158"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46860858","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jacques Lezra, J. Durán, Nico Baumbach, Steven Marsh, A. Toscano, M. Vishmidt, Genevieve Yue
Abstract What do we need to know about “art” or “class struggle” before considering their relation to one another? Could you describe a specific work or text that might serve as an illustration of class struggle or as an exploration of the problem of representing it? Let us say that visual art, broadly speaking, does express the worldview of the dominant class. What kind of art then expresses the worldview of, say, hedge fund managers? Does the dialectic of the visible and invisible still hold for conceptual and post-conceptual art? What alternative critical apparatus would you propose, since neither Lenin nor John William Cooke seemed to care much for art. Why should we?
{"title":"Art and Class Struggle","authors":"Jacques Lezra, J. Durán, Nico Baumbach, Steven Marsh, A. Toscano, M. Vishmidt, Genevieve Yue","doi":"10.1162/artm_a_00302","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00302","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract What do we need to know about “art” or “class struggle” before considering their relation to one another? Could you describe a specific work or text that might serve as an illustration of class struggle or as an exploration of the problem of representing it? Let us say that visual art, broadly speaking, does express the worldview of the dominant class. What kind of art then expresses the worldview of, say, hedge fund managers? Does the dialectic of the visible and invisible still hold for conceptual and post-conceptual art? What alternative critical apparatus would you propose, since neither Lenin nor John William Cooke seemed to care much for art. Why should we?","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"97-125"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46537528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Taxonomy of Breathing is a socially conscious, multidisciplinary art project that investigates our current societal moment through the lens of breath—its vulnerability to restriction, and its power of transformation. The fragility of the body—with breath as its essential element—is a manifestation of our environment, our historical moment, and our political and social context. It is at once foundational and aspirational, embodied, and symbolic.
{"title":"Taxonomy of Breathing","authors":"tAXONOMY OF BrEAtHING","doi":"10.1162/artm_a_00306","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00306","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Taxonomy of Breathing is a socially conscious, multidisciplinary art project that investigates our current societal moment through the lens of breath—its vulnerability to restriction, and its power of transformation. The fragility of the body—with breath as its essential element—is a manifestation of our environment, our historical moment, and our political and social context. It is at once foundational and aspirational, embodied, and symbolic.","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"202-206"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47914599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article looks closely at the inclusion of Albanian Socialist Realism in one of renowned Swiss curator Harald Szeemann's last exhibitions, Blood & Honey: The Future's in the Balkans (Essl Museum, Vienna, 2003). In this exhibition, Szeemann installed a group of around 40 busts created during the socialist era in Albania, which he had seen installed at the National Gallery of Arts in Tirana. This installation of sculptures was part of an exhibition entitled Homo Socialisticus, curated by Gëzim Qëndro, and Szeemann deployed it as a generalized foil for “subversive” postsocialist contemporary art included in Blood & Honey. The Homo Socialisticus sculptures occupied a prominent place in the exhibition both spatially and rhetorically, and this article examines how we might read Blood & Honey—and the socialist past in general—through Szeemann's problematic incorporation of this collection of works in one of the key Balkans-oriented exhibitions staged in the early 2000s. The article argues that understanding how Szeemann misread—and discursively oversimplified—Albanian Socialist Realism can help us see not only the continued provincialization of Albania in the contemporary global art world, but more importantly the fundamental misunderstanding of Socialist Realism as a historical phenomenon and a precursor to contemporary geopolitical cultural configurations
{"title":"“I Lived without Seeing These Art Works”: (Albanian) Socialist Realism and/against Contemporary Art","authors":"Raino Isto","doi":"10.1162/artm_a_00291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00291","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article looks closely at the inclusion of Albanian Socialist Realism in one of renowned Swiss curator Harald Szeemann's last exhibitions, Blood & Honey: The Future's in the Balkans (Essl Museum, Vienna, 2003). In this exhibition, Szeemann installed a group of around 40 busts created during the socialist era in Albania, which he had seen installed at the National Gallery of Arts in Tirana. This installation of sculptures was part of an exhibition entitled Homo Socialisticus, curated by Gëzim Qëndro, and Szeemann deployed it as a generalized foil for “subversive” postsocialist contemporary art included in Blood & Honey. The Homo Socialisticus sculptures occupied a prominent place in the exhibition both spatially and rhetorically, and this article examines how we might read Blood & Honey—and the socialist past in general—through Szeemann's problematic incorporation of this collection of works in one of the key Balkans-oriented exhibitions staged in the early 2000s. The article argues that understanding how Szeemann misread—and discursively oversimplified—Albanian Socialist Realism can help us see not only the continued provincialization of Albania in the contemporary global art world, but more importantly the fundamental misunderstanding of Socialist Realism as a historical phenomenon and a precursor to contemporary geopolitical cultural configurations","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"29-49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49295729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Amy Sara Carroll's ReMex: Toward an Art History of the NAFTA Era interprets Mexico City-based, feminist, and border, or Chicano, art in and around the 1990s. Its premise is that aesthetics and politics “form a loop” in order to express what the author calls “Greater Mexico.” With this term, Carroll proposes that “Mexico” is no longer a territory but rather an imaginary that transcends its geographic borders. In her view, the denationalization brought about by the liberalization of markets led to a multicultural utopia best expressed in border art and art concerned with race and gender issues. In her account, aesthetic practice must serve as a direct weapon against “NAFTAfication” and colonial heteropatriarchy. Carroll draws an analogy between the selling out of the nation through the NAFTA treaty and the selling out of “post-Mexican” art to the global culture industry through the ambition of curators, cultural managers and artists who placed Mexico and Mexican contemporary art as key global art destinations by taking advantage of generous State sponsorship brought about by market liberalization. Any hint of cosmopolitism is suspicious and thus Carroll insists on “ReMexing” Mexico.
{"title":"Amy Sara Carroll's ReMex: Toward an Art History of the NAFTA Era","authors":"Irmgard Emmelhainz","doi":"10.1162/artm_r_00295","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_r_00295","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Amy Sara Carroll's ReMex: Toward an Art History of the NAFTA Era interprets Mexico City-based, feminist, and border, or Chicano, art in and around the 1990s. Its premise is that aesthetics and politics “form a loop” in order to express what the author calls “Greater Mexico.” With this term, Carroll proposes that “Mexico” is no longer a territory but rather an imaginary that transcends its geographic borders. In her view, the denationalization brought about by the liberalization of markets led to a multicultural utopia best expressed in border art and art concerned with race and gender issues. In her account, aesthetic practice must serve as a direct weapon against “NAFTAfication” and colonial heteropatriarchy. Carroll draws an analogy between the selling out of the nation through the NAFTA treaty and the selling out of “post-Mexican” art to the global culture industry through the ambition of curators, cultural managers and artists who placed Mexico and Mexican contemporary art as key global art destinations by taking advantage of generous State sponsorship brought about by market liberalization. Any hint of cosmopolitism is suspicious and thus Carroll insists on “ReMexing” Mexico.","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"105-117"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43964748","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract “To Mohassess, For the Wall” is an article written in 1964 by Jalal Al-e Ahmad, one of the most influential and charismatic Iranian intellectuals of the time. Three years before writing this article, Al-e Ahmad had published Weststruckness, discussing the Iranians’ cultural alienation caused by the dependence on the west. In “To Mohassess, For the Wall”, Al-e Ahmad shifts his analysis to Iranian painting, arguing that Iranian painters during the 1960s merely repeat Western cultural processes and strategies instead of constructing Iranian ones. The context for Al-e Ahmad's argument is the Pahlavi regime's radical program of rapid modernization, which in the area of the arts was systematically expanded. Critical, provocative or problematic, the article offers a crucial window into the adoption of Western-style modernism by Iranian painters during the 1960s and into how an “insider” intellectual such as Al-e Ahmad evaluated the modernization of Iranian art before the background of what he perceived as the critical neglect of Iranian traditions. The text is addressed to Bahman Mohassess, a painter whom Al-e Ahmad considered to be one of the few who had not been coopted by the cultural policies of the Shah's regime.
{"title":"Introduction to Jalal AL-E Ahmad's “To Mohassess, For the Wall”","authors":"M. Mirzaei","doi":"10.1162/artm_a_00296","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00296","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “To Mohassess, For the Wall” is an article written in 1964 by Jalal Al-e Ahmad, one of the most influential and charismatic Iranian intellectuals of the time. Three years before writing this article, Al-e Ahmad had published Weststruckness, discussing the Iranians’ cultural alienation caused by the dependence on the west. In “To Mohassess, For the Wall”, Al-e Ahmad shifts his analysis to Iranian painting, arguing that Iranian painters during the 1960s merely repeat Western cultural processes and strategies instead of constructing Iranian ones. The context for Al-e Ahmad's argument is the Pahlavi regime's radical program of rapid modernization, which in the area of the arts was systematically expanded. Critical, provocative or problematic, the article offers a crucial window into the adoption of Western-style modernism by Iranian painters during the 1960s and into how an “insider” intellectual such as Al-e Ahmad evaluated the modernization of Iranian art before the background of what he perceived as the critical neglect of Iranian traditions. The text is addressed to Bahman Mohassess, a painter whom Al-e Ahmad considered to be one of the few who had not been coopted by the cultural policies of the Shah's regime.","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"118-126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49289354","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article maps the complex socio-political terrain negotiated by the Centro de Arte y Comunicación (CAYC) during the early 1970s from Buenos Aires. It shows how the CAYC attempted to continue the internationalising aims which the Instituto Torcuato Di Tella had pursued in the 1960s, while also providing a space for the exhibition and development of Conceptualism that engaged with political conditions in Argentina and in other countries including Brazil, Uruguay, Chile and Columbia, developing the framework of “systems art” in order to do so. The compromises necessitated by CAYC's balancing act opened the organisation, and in particular its director Jorge Glusberg, to accusations of cultural imperialism and complicity: from almost the very beginning, the CAYC project was characterised by dissensus and disagreement. The controversy generated by CAYC – documented in archives, publications and exhibition catalogues – now offers a rich historiographical resource for Latin American art, revealing how competing models of internationalism and Conceptualism were closely intertwined rather than diametrically opposed.
本文描绘了20世纪70年代初布宜诺斯艾利斯艺术中心Comunicación (CAYC)谈判的复杂社会政治地形。它展示了CAYC如何试图继续Torcuato Di Tella研究所在20世纪60年代所追求的国际化目标，同时也为概念主义的展览和发展提供了一个空间，这些概念主义与阿根廷和其他国家(包括巴西、乌拉圭、智利和哥伦比亚)的政治条件相结合，从而发展了“系统艺术”的框架。CAYC的平衡行为所必需的妥协使该组织，特别是其主任Jorge Glusberg，受到文化帝国主义和共谋的指责:几乎从一开始，CAYC项目就以异议和分歧为特征。由CAYC引起的争议——记录在档案、出版物和展览目录中——现在为拉丁美洲艺术提供了丰富的史学资源，揭示了国际主义和概念主义的竞争模式是如何紧密交织在一起的，而不是截然相反的。
{"title":"Navigating Internationalism from Buenos Aires: The Centro de Arte y Comunicación","authors":"C. Spencer","doi":"10.1162/artm_a_00292","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00292","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article maps the complex socio-political terrain negotiated by the Centro de Arte y Comunicación (CAYC) during the early 1970s from Buenos Aires. It shows how the CAYC attempted to continue the internationalising aims which the Instituto Torcuato Di Tella had pursued in the 1960s, while also providing a space for the exhibition and development of Conceptualism that engaged with political conditions in Argentina and in other countries including Brazil, Uruguay, Chile and Columbia, developing the framework of “systems art” in order to do so. The compromises necessitated by CAYC's balancing act opened the organisation, and in particular its director Jorge Glusberg, to accusations of cultural imperialism and complicity: from almost the very beginning, the CAYC project was characterised by dissensus and disagreement. The controversy generated by CAYC – documented in archives, publications and exhibition catalogues – now offers a rich historiographical resource for Latin American art, revealing how competing models of internationalism and Conceptualism were closely intertwined rather than diametrically opposed.","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"50-72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45559204","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract “To Mohassess, For the Wall” is an article written in 1964 by Jalal Al-e Ahmad, one of the most influential and charismatic Iranian intellectuals of the time. Three years before writing this article, Al-e Ahmad had published Weststruckness, discussing the Iranians’ cultural alienation caused by the dependence on the west. In “To Mohassess, For the Wall”, Al-e Ahmad shifts his analysis to Iranian painting, arguing that Iranian painters during the 1960s merely repeat Western cultural processes and strategies instead of constructing Iranian ones. The context for Al-e Ahmad's argument is the Pahlavi regime's radical program of rapid modernization, which in the area of the arts was systematically expanded. Critical, provocative or problematic, the article offers a crucial window into the adoption of Western-style modernism by Iranian painters during the 1960s and into how an “insider” intellectual such as Al-e Ahmad evaluated the modernization of Iranian art before the background of what he perceived as the critical neglect of Iranian traditions. The text is addressed to Bahman Mohassess, a painter whom Al-e Ahmad considered to be one of the few who had not been coopted by the cultural policies of the Shah's regime.
《致mohevaluate, For the Wall》是Jalal Al-e Ahmad于1964年写的一篇文章，他是当时伊朗最有影响力和魅力的知识分子之一。在写这篇文章的三年前，Al-e Ahmad出版了《weststruck》一书，讨论了伊朗人对西方的依赖造成的文化异化。在《为了墙，为了莫哈格尔》一书中，艾哈迈德将他的分析转向了伊朗绘画，认为20世纪60年代的伊朗画家只是在重复西方的文化进程和策略，而不是构建伊朗的文化进程和策略。Al-e Ahmad的论点的背景是巴列维政权的激进的快速现代化计划，这在艺术领域得到了系统的扩展。这篇具有批判性、挑衅性或问题性的文章，提供了一扇重要的窗口，让我们了解1960年代伊朗画家对西方现代主义的采用，以及像Al-e Ahmad这样的“圈内人”知识分子如何评估伊朗艺术的现代化，在他认为伊朗传统遭到批判性忽视之前。这篇文章是写给巴赫曼·莫哈格特的，他是一位画家，艾哈迈德认为他是少数几个没有被沙阿政权的文化政策所采纳的人之一。
{"title":"To Mohassess, For the Wall","authors":"Jalal Al-e Ahmad","doi":"10.1162/artm_a_00297","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/artm_a_00297","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “To Mohassess, For the Wall” is an article written in 1964 by Jalal Al-e Ahmad, one of the most influential and charismatic Iranian intellectuals of the time. Three years before writing this article, Al-e Ahmad had published Weststruckness, discussing the Iranians’ cultural alienation caused by the dependence on the west. In “To Mohassess, For the Wall”, Al-e Ahmad shifts his analysis to Iranian painting, arguing that Iranian painters during the 1960s merely repeat Western cultural processes and strategies instead of constructing Iranian ones. The context for Al-e Ahmad's argument is the Pahlavi regime's radical program of rapid modernization, which in the area of the arts was systematically expanded. Critical, provocative or problematic, the article offers a crucial window into the adoption of Western-style modernism by Iranian painters during the 1960s and into how an “insider” intellectual such as Al-e Ahmad evaluated the modernization of Iranian art before the background of what he perceived as the critical neglect of Iranian traditions. The text is addressed to Bahman Mohassess, a painter whom Al-e Ahmad considered to be one of the few who had not been coopted by the cultural policies of the Shah's regime.","PeriodicalId":41203,"journal":{"name":"ARTMargins","volume":"10 1","pages":"127-136"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44278535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：