Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

A Global Perspective on Eighteenth-Century Chinese Art and Visual Culture

2014; College Art Association; Volume: 96; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/00043079.2014.916549

1559-6478

Cheng-Hua Wang,

Chinese history and philosophy

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes1. See Robert S. Nelson, “The Map of Art History,” Art Bulletin 79, no. 1 (March 1997): 28–40.2. See David Summers, Real Spaces: World Art History and the Rise of Western Modernism (New York: Phaidon Press, 2003).3. James Elkins has expressed this view on different occasions; for example, see “Art History as a Global Discipline,” in Is Art History Global? (London: Routledge, 2007), 3–23.4. For example, see Ginger Cheng-chi Hsu, “Merchant Patronage of the Eighteenth Century Yangchou Painting,” in Artists and Patrons: Some Social and Economic Aspects of Chinese Painting, ed. Chu-tsing Li (Lawrence: University of Kansas, 1989), 215–21; and idem, A Bushel of Pearls: Painting for Sale in Eighteenth-Century Yangchow (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001).5. See Ju-hsi Chou, ed., The Elegant Brush: Chinese Painting under the Qianlong Emperor, 1735–1795 (Phoenix: Phoenix Art Museum, 1985). The writings of the scholars Yang Boda and Nie Chongzheng have been collected and published in their respective scholarly volumes; Yang Boda, Qingdai yuanhua (Beijing: Zijincheng chubanshe, 1993); and Nie Chongzheng, Gongting yishu de guanghui: Qingdai gongting huihua luncong (Taipei: Dongda tushu gongsi, 1996).6. There are several reviews of the New Qing History. For example, see Evelyn S. Rawski, “Re-envisioning the Qing: The Significance of the Qing Period in Chinese History,” Journal of Asian Studies 55, no. 4 (1996): 829–50; and Joanna Waley-Cohen, “The New Qing History,” Radical History Review 88 (Winter 2004): 193–206.7. For example, see Pamela Kyle Crossley, A Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 223–62; Laura Hostetler, “Global or Local? Exploring Connections between Chinese and European Geographical Knowledge during the Early Modern Period,” East Asian Science, Technology, and Medicine, no. 26 (2007): 117–35; and idem, “Westerners at the Qing Court: Tribute and Diplomacy in the Huang Qing Zhigongtu,” in “Xifangren yu Qingdai gongting / Proceedings of the International Symposium ‘Westerners and the Qing Court (1644–1911),’ Renmin University of China, Beijing, October 17–19, 2008,” 227–46. However, they do not give in-depth analyses of the styles of these paintings and prints, including their European sources.8. See Patricia Berger, Empire of Emptiness: Buddhist Art and Political Authority in Qing China (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2003).9. See ibid., chap. 2.10. See Wang Chong-ci, “Qing Gaozong Yuzhiwen chu ji bikanji,” Gugong xueshu jikan 30, no. 2 (Winter 2012): 257–303.11. See Michael Sullivan, The Meeting of Eastern and Western Art: From the Sixteenth Century to the Present Day (London: Thames and Hudson, 1973), 66–86.12. See Harold L. Kahn, “A Matter of Taste: The Monumental and Exotic in the Qianlong Reign,” in Ju-hsi Chou, The Elegant Brush, 288–302; and Howard Rogers, “Court Painting under the Qianlong Emperor,” in ibid., 303–17.13. See Kristina R. Kleutghen, “The Qianlong Emperor's Perspective: Illusionistic Painting in Eighteenth-Century China” (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2010), chap. 1; and Tung Peng, “Jiao Bingzhen shinu tuhui yanjiu” (master's thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, 2013), chap. 1.14. See Marco Musillo, “Reassessing Castiglione's Mission: Translating Italian Training into Qing Commissions,” in “Xifangren yu Qingdai gongting,” 437–60; and idem, “Reconciling Two Careers: The Jesuit Memoir of Giuseppe Castiglione, Lay Brother and Qing Imperial Painter,” Eighteenth-Century Studies 42, no. 1 (Fall 2008): 45–59.15. For example, see John Finlay, “The Qianlong Emperor's Western Vistas: Linear Perspective and Trompe l’Oeil Illustration in the European Palaces of the Yuanming yuan,” Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient, no. 94 (2007): 159–93; and Kleutghen, “The Qianlong Emperor's Perspective.”16. See Wu Hung, “Beyond Stereotypes: The Twelve Beauties in Qing Court Art and the Dream of the Red Chamber,” in Writing Women in Late Imperial China, ed. Ellen Widmer and Kang-i Sun Chang (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997), 306–65; and Shang Wei, “The Story of the Stone and Its Visual Representations, 1791–1919,” in Approaches to Teaching the Story of the Stone, ed. Andrew Schonebaum and Tina Lu (New York: Modern Language Association of America, 2012), 246–80.17. See Shih Shou-chien, “Yi bimo he tiandi: Dui shiba shiji Zhongguo shanshuihua de yige xinlijie,” Guoli Taiwan daxue meishushi yanjiu jikan, no. 26 (March 2009): 1–36.18. See Shih Ching-fei, “Wenhua jingji: Chaoyue qiandai, pimei Xiyang de Qinggong hua falang,” Minsu quyi, no. 182 (December 2013): 149–219.19. Regarding the multinational knowledge of High Qing emperors, see Ge Zhaoguang, “Zuowei sixiangshi de guyutu,” in Dongya lishi shang de tianxia yu Zhongguo gainian, ed. Kan Huai-chen (Taipei: Guoli Taiwan daxue chuban zhongxin, 2007), 217–54.20. See Cheng-hua Wang, “Capital as Political Stage: The 1761 Syzygy in Image” (forthcoming).21. The discussion of copperplate printing in High Qing China is originally developed in Cheng-hua Wang, “Prints in Sino-European Artistic Interactions of the Early Modern Period,” in Face to Face: The Transcendence of the Arts in China and Beyond, ed. Rui Oliveira Lopes (Lisbon: University of Lisbon, 2014), 433–42. The following passages about Qing court prints are based on this article.22. See Lai Yu-chih, “Tuxiang, zhishi yu diguo: Qinggong de shihuoji tuhui,” Gugong xueshu jikan 29, no. 2 (Winter 2011): 1–76; and idem, “Qinggong dui Ouzhou ziranshi zhishi de zaizhi: Yi Qianlong chao Shoupu weili,” Zhongyang yanjiuyuan Jindaishi yanjiusuo jikan, no. 80 (June 2013): 1–75.23. See Benjamin A. Elman, From Philosophy to Philology: Intellectual and Social Aspects of Change in Late Imperial China (Cambridge, Mass.: Council on East Asian Studies, Harvard University, 1984), chap. 2; and idem, On Their Own Terms: Science in China, 1550–1900 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2005), chaps. 6, 7.24. For Prospering Suzhou, see Wang Cheng-hua, “Qianlong chao Suzhou chengshi tuxiang: Zhengzhi quanli, wenhua xiaofei yu dijing suzao,” Zhongyang yanjiuyuan Jindaishi yanjiusuo jikan, no. 50 (December 2005): 115–84; and Ma Ya-chen, “Zhongjie yu difang yu zhongyang zhijian: Shengshi zisheng tu de shuangchong xingge,” Guoli Taiwan daxue meishushi yanjiu jikan, no. 24 (March 2008): 259–322.25. For a detailed study of the Zhigong project, including the making of different versions, see Lai Yu-chih, “Tuxiang diguo: Zhigong tu de zhizuo yu didu chengxiang,” Zhongyang yanjiuyuan Jindaishi yanjiusuo jikan, no. 75 (March 2012): 1–75. Regarding the Zhigong images and their possible European sources, see Cheng-hua Wang, “Costumes and Customs, Males and Females: Representing Peoples and Places at the Court of the Qianlong Emperor (r. 1736–1795)” (forthcoming).26. For a more thorough study of this scroll and other related paintings, see Cheng-hua Wang, “Global and Local: European Stylistic Elements in Eighteenth-Century Chinese Cityscapes” (forthcoming).27. For example, Dong Jianzhong uses Lists of Tribute (Gongdan) and Lists of Submission (Jindan) to discuss European objects that Jesuit priests presented to Qianlong; Dong Jianzhong, “Chuanjiaoshi jingong yu Qianlong huangdi de Xiyang pinwei,” Qingshi yanjiu, no. 3 (August 2009): 95–106. John Finlay examines the collection of Chinese objects accumulated by Henri Bertin through his correspondence with Jesuit priests in Beijing, in “Henri Bertin and the Commerce in Images between France and China in the Late Eighteenth Century” (forthcoming).28. For example, see Hiromitsu Kobayashi, “Suzhou Prints and Western Perspective: The Painting Techniques of Jesuit Artists at the Qing Court, and Dissemination of the Contemporary Court Style of Painting to Mid-Eighteenth-Century Chinese Society through Woodblock Prints,” in The Jesuit II: Cultures, Sciences, and the Arts, 1540–1773, by John W. O’Malley, SJ, et al. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006), 262–86.29. See Kohara Hironobu, “Sandō sekisetsuzu no nisan no mondai—Sōshu hanga no kōzuhō,” Yamato bunka, no. 58 (August 1973): 9–23. In addition to landscapes, for the features that link Suzhou prints and court painting, see Wang Cheng-hua, “Qianlong chao Suzhou chengshi tuxiang,” 150–52.30. See James Cahill, Pictures for Use and Pleasure: Vernacular Painting in High Qing China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010), esp. chap. 3.31. See Jonathan Hay, “Culture, Ethnicity, and Empire in the Work of Two Eighteenth-Century ‘Eccentric’ Artists,” Res, no. 35 (Spring 1999): 201–23.32. From the late Kangxi period on, the High Qing court had issued orders at intervals against Catholic proselytization in China, but their effectiveness depended on how they were executed by the central and local governments. For the general picture of Catholic preaching in China from the late sixteenth to the early eighteenth century, see Liam Matthew Brockey, Journey to the East: The Jesuit Mission to China, 1579–1724 (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007).33. See Eugenio Menegon, Ancestors, Virgins, and Friars: Christianity as a Local Religion in Late Imperial China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2009); and Henrietta Harrison, The Missionary Curse and Other Tales from a Chinese Catholic Village (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2013).34. See Gao Huashi (Noël Golvers), trans. Zhao Dianhong, ed. Liu Yimin, Qingchu Yesuhui shi Lu Riman Changshou zhangben ji lingxiu biji yanjiu (Zhengzhou shi: Daxiang chubanshe, 1997), 104–51. Lu Riman is the Chinese name of François de Rougemont, a Flemish priest who lived from 1624 to 1676.35. See the letter written by the French priest François Xavier d’Entrecolles included as an appendix to a book by Stephen W. Bushell, Description of Chinese Pottery and Porcelain (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910), 204. For the annotation of this text, see Yin Hongxu (François Xavier d’Entrecolles), trans. and ed. Kobayashi Taichirō, Chūgoku tōji kenbunroku (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1979), 250. I owe thanks to Wang Shu-chin for mentioning this book to me.36. See Sun Yunqiu, Jingshi [History of Lenses] (n.p., ca. 1680), n.p. Jingshi is a rare book in the collection of the Shanghai Library. I would like to thank Opher Mansour for pointing out the features of Dutch architecture to me.37. For European city views in Japan, see Timon Screech, The Lens within the Heart: The Western Scientific Gaze and Popular Imagery in Later Edo Japan (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2002), chap. 4; and Cheng-hua Wang, “Prints in Sino-European Artistic Interactions,” 438–39, 448, 450.38. See Tung Peng, “Jiao Bingzhen shinu tuhui yanjiu,” 18–23.39. For this screen, see Wu Hung, The Double Screen: Medium and Representation in Chinese Painting (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), chap. 4.40. The term tieluo refers to a category of utilitarian paintings that could be easily attached to and removed from walls or screens. For large-scale tieluo of the Qianlong period, see Kleutghen, “The Qianlong Emperor's Perspective.”41. See Finlay, ““Henri Bertin and the Commerce in Images between France and China.”42. For the production and consumption of these prints, see Wang Cheng-hua, “Qingdai chu zhong qi Suzhou banhua de shangye mianxiang,” in Zhongyang yanjiuyuan Jindaishi yanjiusuo jikan (forthcoming).43. For the biography of Ding Yuntai, see Fang Hao, Zhongguo Tianzhujiao shi renwu zhuan, vol. 2 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1988), 99–104.44. See Han Qi and Wu Min, eds., Ouzhou suocang Tianzhujiao wenxian huibian (Shanghai: Renmin chubanshe, 2008), 216.45. See ibid., 219.46. See Liang Tingnan, ed., and Yuan Zhongren, annot., Yuehaiguan zhi jiaozhuben (Guangzhou: Guangdong renmin chubanshe, 2002), 173–95. A discussion of trade and trade routes between China and Europe is beyond the scope of this essay.47. For example, see Michael Greenberg, British Trade and the Opening of China 1800–42 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1951), chap. 3; and Chen Kuo-tung, “Neiwufu guanyuan de waipai, wairen yu Qianlong gongting wenwu gongji zhijian de guanxi,” Guoli Taiwan daxue meishushi yanjiu jikan, no. 33 (September 2012): 225–69. I owe thanks to Chen Kuo-tung for offering his expertise on the Canton trade system.48. For a general survey of some European objects in the local societies of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century China, see Zheng Yangwen, China on the Sea: How the Maritime World Shaped Modern China (Leiden: Brill, 2012), chap. 6.49. See Wang Cheng-hua, “Qingdai chu zhong qi Suzhou banhua de shangye mianxiang.”50. See Li Dou, Yangzhou huafang lu (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1997), 264–65.51. For these Yangzhou painters, see Alfreda Murck, “Yuan Jiang: Image Maker,” in “Chinese Painting under the Qianlong Emperor: The Symposium Papers in Two Volumes,” ed. Ju-hsi Chou and Claudia Brown, special issue, Phoebus, vol. 6, nos. 1, 2 (1991): no. 2, 228–59; and Anita Chung, Drawing Boundaries: Architectural Images in Qing China (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2004), 65–74.52. See Cahill, Pictures for Use and Pleasure.53. Hay (“Culture, Ethnicity, and Empire,” 220–21) identifies the provenance of Luo Ping's image of two skeletons. For further research, see Yeewan Koon, “Ghost Amusement,” in Eccentric Visions: The Worlds of Luo Ping, ed. Kim Karlsson, Alfreda Murck, and Michele Matteini (Zurich: Museum Rietburg, 2009), 182–99.54. For example, see Craig Clunas, Chinese Export Watercolors (London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1984); Carl Crossman, The Decorative Arts of the China Trade (Suffolk, U.K.: Antique Collectors’ Club, 1991); and Jiang Yinghe, Qingdai yanghua yu Guangzhou kou’an (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2007).55. For late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century art in Guangdong, see Yeewan Koon, A Defiant Brush: Su Renshan and the Politics of Painting in Early Nineteenth Century Guangdong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2014), chap. 1.56. See ibid. However, this source does not mention the works of Huang Yue (1750–1841), a court painter of the Jiaqing period (1796–1820) specializing in genre subjects.57. For the connection of the court and these cities through imperial factories, see Gugong bowuyuan and Bolin Mapu xuehui kexueshisuo, eds., Gongting yu difang: Shiqi dao shiba shiji de jishu jiaoliu (Beijing: Zijincheng chubanshe, 2010).58. For example, see Shih Ching-fei, Riyue guanghua: Qinggong hua falang (Taipei: Guoli Gugong bowuyuan, 2012), esp. 44–63; and Shih Ching-fei and Wang Chong-ci, “Qianlong chao Yuehaiguan chengzuo zhi ‘Guangfalang,’” Guoli Taiwan daxue meishushi yanjiu jikan, no. 35 (September 2013): 87–184.59. See Antonia Finnane, Speaking of Yangzhou: A Chinese City, 1550–1850 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Asia Center, 2004), chap. 8.60. See Machida shiritsu kokusai hanga bijutsukan, ed., Chūgoku no yōfūga ten: Minmatsu kara Shin jidai kaiga, hanga, sashiebon (Machida: Machida shiritsu kokusai hanga bijutsukan, 1995).61. See Oka Yasumasa, “Chūgoku no seikokei to Nippon no uki-e,” Kōbe shiritsu hakubutsukan kenkyū kiyō, no. 15 (March 1999): 1–22. Peep boxes were one kind of optical device that circulated globally in the early modern period.62. See Tangdai, Huishi fawe, in Hualun congkan, ed. Yu Anlan (Taipei: Huazheng shuju, 1984), 235–57; and Zou Yigui, Xiaoshan huapu, in Zou Yigui shengping kao yu Xiaoshan huapu jiaojian, ed. Pan Wenxie (Hangzhou: Zhongguo meishu xueyuan chubanshe, 2010), 91–153. For Tangdai's dates, see Ju-hsi Chou, “Tangdai: A Biographical Sketch,” in Chou and Brown, “Chinese Painting under the Qianlong Emperor,” no. 1, 132–40.63. See David Armitage, “Is There a Pre-history of Globalization?” in Comparison and History: Europe in Cross-National Perspective, ed. Deborah Cohen and Maura O’Connor (New York: Routledge, 2004), 165–76; and Bartolomé Yun Casalilla, “Localism, Global History and Transnational History: A Reflection from the Historian of Early Modern Europe,” Historisk Tidskrift 127, no. 4 (2007): 650–78. Armitage also points out that the globalization process is not single but multiple, depending on the global economic, political, or sociocultural features that one investigates. And the situation of globalization in the modern period is not necessarily heir to that of the early modern period.64. One example is that Edo Japan imported perspectival pictures from both China and the Netherlands; the pictures from China may have been made there or in Europe but sold to Japan by Chinese merchants. Without an understanding of the global flow of this kind of picture, the visual effects seen in some Japanese prints of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries cannot be adequately explored. For related research, see Wang Cheng-hua, “Qianlong chao Suzhou chengshi tuxiang,” 146–50; and Oka Yasumasa, “Chūgoku no seikokei to Nippon no uki-e,” 1–22.65. See Wu Hung, “Beyond Stereotypes,” 306–65; and Tung Peng, “Jiao Bingzhen shinu tuhui yanjiu,” chaps. 2, 3.66. See James Elkins, Chinese Landscape Painting as Western Art History (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2010). See also the review of the book by Robert Harrist in the Art Bulletin 93, no. 2 (June 2011): 249–53. I owe thanks to Lai Yu-chih for sharing her view on the book.67. Ibid., 40–42. For example, Richard M. Barnhart argues that the concept of spatial quality was prevalent in the realm of art of the Song period. See Barnhart, “The Song Experiment with Mimesis,” in Bridge to Heaven: Essays on East Asian Art in Honor of Professor Wen Fong, ed. Jerome Silbergeld et al. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011), 115–40.68. See Elkins, Is Art History Global?; and James Elkins, Zhivka Valiavicharska, and Alice Kim, eds., Art and Globalization (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2010). For related discussion, see Monica Juneja, “Global Art History and the ‘Burden of Representation,’” in Global Studies: Mapping Contemporary Art and Culture, ed. Hans Belting et al. (Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz, 2011), 279; and Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, “Reflections on World Art History,” in Circulations: Global Art History and Materialist Historicism, ed. Kaufmann, Catherine Dossin, and Béatrice Joyeux-Prunel (forthcoming).69. Other edited volumes include Kitty Zijlmans and Wilfried van Damme, eds., World Art Studies: Exploring Concepts and Approaches (Amsterdam: Valiz, 2008).Additional informationNotes on contributorsCheng-Hua WangCheng-hua Wang specializes in early modern and modern Chinese art. Her publications in Chinese are collected in a volume (China Academy of Art). Her English publications include contributions to The Art Bulletin and Artibus Asiae and the volumes Reinventing the Past and The Role of Japan in Modern Chinese Art [Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica, Taipei 115, Taiwan, chenghua@gate.sinica.edu.tw].