江东伦敦跨艺旅思02：中国舞蹈的“现代性”问题

“现代性”问题似乎是参加2013“跨艺”的学者们仍十分感兴趣的话题，从2011台北“跨艺”将此列为议题，到目前为止，仍有这么多学者对此兴趣浓厚，想必该问题对关注者在关注视角上的持续性发酵，的确是一个具有非凡吸引力的角度。

实际上，中国大陆学术界对于“现代性”问题早就很热了，而且已经进入到较为广泛和深入的视角。不过不能否认的是，想想这么多年的中国大陆思想学界，几乎所有思潮的引发都受到了外来潮流的引启，自然“现代性”问题亦不例外。只是，“话题”虽是外来的，但中国社会自身所遇到的诸多难题，却实实在在与这个概念直接相关。

体现在舞蹈层面，“现代性”的讨论亦不乏其论，“中国舞蹈”报曾数度组织这方面的讨论，一些年轻舞蹈学者的观点也都引起过大家的注意。概括而言，我们所遇到的一些主要问题，几乎都成二元对立之貌，比如：“中与西”、“传统与现代”、“器与道”等。

说“现代性”很容易想到“现代化”问题，而“现代化”又会直接将“现代舞”联系起来。不过，如果认为“现代性”只是“现代舞”的事，那认识问题的角度显然就发生位移了。毫无疑问，“现代舞”自然与“现代性”相关，但“现代性”所指涉的问题却完全可以让我们站在一个更深的层面上予以讨论。

实际上，中国的当代舞蹈文化都是具有“现代指向”的，因为说到底，中国传统的舞蹈形式无论是器的层面还是道的层面，都没有直接传下来。吕艺生先生认为这是中国当代舞蹈与传统的“断裂”。画家陈丹青先生认为，五四以来的新文化运动是“文化激进主义”的体现。虽然，古代舞蹈的断流不能赖在五四运动的身上，但五四运动却的确像一个分水岭，让之后发展起来的中国新舞蹈艺术的的确确沐浴了西方工业文明的启蒙。所以说，一直绵亘至今的中国当代舞蹈文化，由于远离自己的“根”而与我们这个社会发生的种种错位与再对位，其“现代性”的内涵是十分丰富的。在这样的理念并伴随着新中国制度相继经历了文革和经济全球化过程而一路走过来的中国舞蹈，虽然自身一直在不断地提醒着自己的文化航向，但所面临着诸多的困惑，都可以让我们通过“现代性”的话语域来认识、来思考。因此，“现代性”的话题，或许会提供给我们一把钥匙也未可知呢，因为它让我们拥有了一个面对我们现状中许多问题的独特视角。

自然，中国大陆的舞蹈文化已经延续了六十余年，虽历经“现代性”问题的诸多考验，却也从未消失而顽强地不断前行，这首先证明了中国文化本身的特性：总能走下去。那么，面对一个在实践上已经高度成型的机体以及支持这一机体继续走下去的大环境和大背景，我们关于“现代性”的思考是否可以让它获得更丰富的养料呢？拭目以待。

Translation…

Jiang Dong’s London Reflections 02: The question of “modernism” in Chinese dance

The topic of “modernism” appeared to be one in which the 2013 ArtsCross academics were keenly interested. Since 2011, when it was listed as a topic of discussion at the Taipei “ArtsCross” until today, academics have remained interested in this topic. Given the continued interest of observers in the topic, it seems that this truly is a very attractive area.

In reality, mainland Chinese academics have been familiar with the question of “modernism” for a long time, and have already explored the question quite thoroughly. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that almost all of the ideas which have appeared in the realm of Chinese academia have been inspired by outward influences. Naturally, “modernism” is no exception. But while the “concept” originates from outside China, Chinese society contains many of its own conundrums, which are directly linked to this concept.

In the world of dance, there is no lack of discussion around “modernism”. The newspaper Chinese Dance has organised a number of discussions on this topic. What is more, the views of various young scholars of dance have attracted a lot of attention. Generally speaking, a number of the issues which we encounter are almost binary oppositions, for example: “Chinese and Western,” “traditional and modern,” “form and meaning”, etc.

When we talk about “modernism”, it is natural to think about the issue of “modernisation”. What is more, “modernisation” can provide a direct linkage to “modern dance.” But if we think that “modernism” is only about “modern dance”, then our understanding of the issue has shifted. Without doubt, “modern dance” is naturally connected to the concept of “modernism”. However, the areas which fall within the ambit of “modernism” need to be discussed at a more in-depth level.

In reality, Chinese contemporary dance culture is inherently “modernist” since, whether at the level of form or at the level of meaning, traditional Chinese dance forms have not been directly handed down from the past. Lu Yisheng considers that this constitutes a “rupture” between Chinese contemporary dance and traditional dance. The painter Chen Danqing has expressed the view that the New Culture Movement which came in the wake of the May 4th Movement is a manifestation of “cultural radicalism.” While it is not fair to lay blame for the rupture with ancient dance at the feet of the May 4th Movement, it does seem that this Movement was a kind of watershed, and the new forms of Chinese dance which developed following this movement were imbued with inspiration from Western culture from the industrial age. So Chinese contemporary dance, having been cut off from its “roots” and having experienced many ‘dislocations’ and ‘realignments’ with society, possesses a rich streak of “modernism.” Within this conceptual framework, and against the context of the systematic changes which have taken place in China including the cultural revolution and economic globalisation, Chinese dance, while always undertaking cultural course corrections, has faced many perplexing situations, all of which can be understood and considered through the language of “modernism”. Thus, it may be that the concept of “modernism” may provide us with a kind of key, since it provides us with a unique perspective on the many issues that we are faced with today.

Mainland Chinese dance culture has been developing for over 60 years now, and while it has encountered many of the challenges brought by “modernism”, it has not faded away, and continues onwards stubbornly. This demonstrates one of the characteristics of Chinese culture: it can always keep going. So, faced with such a highly developed “organism”, and an environment which allows this “organism” to continue to develop, is there anything we can do to provide more “nourishment” to thinking around “modernism”? Let’s wait and see.