廢墟人物：于貝・霍貝的廢墟畫中人物的意義與功能

Abstract

于貝．霍貝 (Hubert Robert, 1703–1808)，也被稱作「廢墟的霍貝」(Robert des Ruines)，以廢墟畫作聞名，許多針對霍貝的研究主要著重於分析廢墟所蘊含的意義，幾乎忽略了霍貝廢墟畫中數量眾多的人物。在霍貝的主流研究中，大多傾向認同狄德羅(Denis Diderot, 1713–84)的想法，即，它們在霍貝的廢墟畫中儼然是對廢墟體現憂鬱、詩意，以及崇高(sublime) 之美的干擾，對於藝術家安排如此大量的人物在廢墟之中感到困惑不解。本研究將為霍貝的廢墟人物辯護，採與狄德羅相反的觀點來詮釋。本文首章以多重面向分析藝術家的人格特質以及在歷史上的社會角色來理解藝術家的創作脈絡；基於霍貝的「群居性」，我們主張將這些廢墟視為一種論壇或是社會性場域來觀看，本文第一章以「廢墟作為社交場所」佐以視覺證據來論證——霍貝的大量廢墟人物為綜合藝術家創作動機、視覺語境之下必要且合理的存在。重新定義霍貝廢墟的屬性之後，第二章則著重於分析這些廢墟人物不同層次的意涵，以霍貝於1784年完成的成對畫為例，從畫面中所呈現之「視覺迴聲」 (visual echo) 來展示這些人物如何在畫面之中對話，並展示人物互動之間所形塑的視覺趣味與意義。第三章則以約翰・胡伊青加(Johan Huizinga)以及霍歇・卡約瓦(Roger Caillois)的兩種遊戲理論做為基礎，輔以當代對於遊戲性之跨領域定義以及藝術家作品中的實例論證，如何將霍貝的繪畫作為一種「視覺遊戲」來詮釋。霍貝的人物因而從廢墟之美的干擾者，躍身成為觀者體驗視覺遊戲的重要角色。綜上述，本文旨在以與狄德羅對立的視角來詮釋霍貝的廢墟與其中之人物，這些人物作為可被辨認、解讀、分析的視覺符號，為特定觀眾帶來觀賞的審美愉悅。因此，霍貝的廢墟人物在意義與功能的層次上超越了傳統風景畫中的裝飾人物(staffage)。

Hubert Robert (1733–1808), known in French as “Robert des Ruines,” became famous for his paintings depicting ancient monuments in different dilapidated states. While much has been written about the ruins, little has been said regarding the figures that inhabited them. To better explain the meaning and function of Robert’s figures, this study reconsiders the way they interact with their environment. In the first chapter, we propose that the lively presence of crowds in Robert’s ruins transform them into a civic space, in opposition to Diderot’s conception which appraises the genre as a melancholy site for solitary reflections on time passing. In the second chapter, a careful analysis of a pendant of two paintings realized in 1784, namely Antique Capriccio with the Statue of Marcus Aurelius and Antique Capriccio with the Portico of Octavia shows that Hubert Robert staged his figures very carefully and differently in each painting, with the apparent ambition to establish a “visual game.” This difference in treatment was meant to enhance a series of contrasts and visual echoes that were in phase with the principles that governed pendants at the time. The repetitions of some details also participate in a deliberate strategy meant to offer playful elements of comparison to the attentive viewer. We finally demonstrate in the third chapter that Robert’s figures play a symbolic role in his compositions and are part of a series of visual games designed for a particular beholder. Crucial to the understanding of his work, figures requested to be recognized and decoded, enhancing the playful dimension of the viewing process in the elitist context of art appreciation of the time.