一提到「中國現代藝術」，就讓人立刻連想到一群極受注目的中國藝術家、藝評人、策展人和理論家，當中包括王廣義、徐冰、高名潞、栗憲庭、呂澎等人。他們現時在中國藝術圈的地位已不容置疑，而要研究文革後中國的藝術發展概況，他們的理論及研究已被確立並普遍為學者應用。由1990年開始，他們的出版、展覽、研討會，都圍繞著一班八十年代借用歐美現代藝術風格及主張來創作的青年藝術家，並稱他們的作品為「中國現代藝術」及「中國當代藝術」。但讓人不理解的是，這些藝評人等始終未能就「現代」和「當代」這兩個概念作出恰當的解釋，有時甚至混淆不清；而且自九十年代初開始，大部份有關他們所詮譯的「中國現代藝術」的研究、著作及展覽已見既定模式、參與藝術家及籌劃人，當中某些論點亦見牽強。基於這些問題，現在我們所理解的「中國現代藝術」能否代表中國真正的現代藝術？在現時「中國現代藝術」似乎是某一撮人的「現代藝術」的情形下，而他們又是如此具權威地發表觀點時，我們需要重新了解八十年代的政治社會及文化氣候，以及當時藝術圈的各種關係，從而對現在所認識的「中國現代藝術」作一個客觀的理解及評論。 / 中國美術家協會所出版的《美術》雜誌，就能讓我們探究八十年代的各類政治、社會、藝術狀況。透過對其文章及投稿人的分析後發現，當時有三個不同的藝術圈，各自因應政治氣候及藝術圈的屬性，去詮譯自己的「現代藝術」，它們在這論文分別被稱為「官方藝術的現代性」、「中國傳統藝術現代化」及「新藝術潮流」，而「新藝術潮流」亦演化成今天的「中國現代藝術」。八十年代的「中國現代藝術」的面貌與今天截然不同，究其原因，可利用法國社會學理論家皮埃爾．布迪厄的「場」、「習性」及「文化資本」理論作出分析。總括而言，透過《美術》的文本闡析，再配合社會學理論的支持，這個研究運用了嶄新角度去剖析「中國現代藝術的意義與內涵」，並讓我們進一步反思「文化製造」、「文化權力」及「藝術史撰寫」等一系列問題。 / The first names that come to mind when one talks about "Chinese modern art" are the group of high-profile Chinese artists, art critics, curators and theorists, including well-known names such as Wang Guangyi, Xu Bing, Gao Minglu, Li Xianting, Lu Peng etc. Their current standing within the Chinese art circle is almost indisputable. In terms of the study of the development of Chinese art in the post-Cultural-Revolution era, their theories and research have been well-established, and widely adopted by other scholars. Ever since 1990, their publications, exhibitions and symposiums have centered on a group of young artists, who borrowed from Euro-American modernist artistic styles and views to create in the post-Mao period. Furthermore, such art critics-curators have coined these artworks as "Chinese modern art" and "Chinese contemporary art". However, these art critics-curators have yet to come up with appropriate definitions for the notions of "modern" and "contemporary", allowing them to be used in confusing and ambiguous ways at times. Since the 1990s, the majority of their research, publications and exhibitions on "Chinese modern art" have developed into fixed models, with set participating artists and contributors. At the same time, certain arguments within such discourses are deemed unconvincing and far-fetched. In view of such issues, this paper begs to ask - whether the "Chinese modern art" that we have come to know nowadays, is a truthful representation of modern art in China? Under such circumstance where "Chinese modern art" seems to be a "modern art" history of a selected few; and, as these art critics-curators carry on professing their view however authoritatively, if we want to formulate a more objective understanding and commentary on the “Chinese modern art that we now know of, we will need to start afresh in our understanding of the political and cultural climate in the 1980s, and the various relations within the art field at the time. / Meishu, published by the China Artists' Association, provides us an entry point in which the political and artistic situations in the 1980s can be examined. An analysis on the articles and the contributors reveals that there were three different art circles, each formulating their own interpretation of "modern art", in accordance to the political climate and the nature of their own artistic field. They have been discussed in this paper as "Officialdom", "Modernization of Chinese traditional painting" and "New Trends in Art" ; among which, "New Trends in Art" became the "Chinese modern art" in today's term. Hence, the landscape of "Chinese modern art" in the 1980s was different from today's situation. To understand why there was such a difference, then, concepts of "fields", "habitus" and "cultural capital" proposed by the French social theorist, Pierre Bourdieu, can be adopted as analytical tools. All in all, through literary review of Meishu, with the support of sociological theories, this research offers a different angle to dissect the meanings and inner values of "Chinese modern Art", and allow us to further reflect on the various issues in relation to "cultural production", "cultural power", and "the practice of writing art history". / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Li, Ting Lin. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2013. / Includes bibliographical references. / Electronic reproduction. Hong Kong : Chinese University of Hong Kong, [2012] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Abstracts in also in Chinese; includes Chinese. / Abstract --- p.i / Acknowledgement --- p.iv / Table of Contents --- p.vi / Chapter CHAPTER ONE: --- INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND / Chapter A) --- WHY 1979 TO 1989? THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT --- p.1 / Chapter B) --- WHY MEISHU MAGAZINE? / Chapter 1. --- Magazines as a form of documentation of social and cultural developments --- p.4 / Chapter 2. --- The unique background and character of Meishu --- p.17 / Chapter C) --- THE DISCUSSION ABOUT MODERN ART: TWO PERIODS --- p.26 / Chapter D) --- THE VALUE AND STRENGTH OF THIS RESEARCH --- p.30 / Chapter E) --- SCOPE OF RESEARCH AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY --- p.34 / Chapter CHAPTER TWO: --- MEISHUMAGAZINE--ITS BACKGROUND, ROLE AND SIGNIFICANCE / Chapter A) --- INTRODUCTION --- p.38 / Chapter B) --- THE BEGINNINGS OF MEISHU AND ITS LATER DEVELOPMENT --- p.41 / Chapter C) --- STRUCTURE OF THE CHINA ARTISTS' ASSOCIATION AND MEISHU --- p.42 / Chapter D) --- EDITORIAL LINE --- p.46 / Chapter E) --- CONTENT ANALYSIS / Chapter 1. --- Areas Covered and System of Classification --- p.57 / Chapter 2. --- Content Composition --- p.65 / Chapter 3. --- Trends and Later Developments --- p.75 / Chapter 4. --- Modern Art: Three Discourses --- p.80 / Chapter F) --- COMPOSITION OF MEISHU'S EDITORIAL GROUP --- p.86 / Chapter G) --- MEISHU AND THE TREND OF ART THOUGHT, JIANGSU PICTORIAL, AND FINE ARTS IN CHINA, AND THEIR FASCINATION WITH "NEW TRENDS IN ART" --- p.97 / Chapter H) --- CONCLUSION --- p.115 / Chapter CHAPTER THREE: --- DISCUSSION OF "CHINESE MODERN ART":A REVIEW FROM MEISHU ZAZHI 1979-1989 / Chapter A) --- INITIATION / "Chinese Modern Art": Celebrated yet illusory --- p.121 / Chapter B) --- "CHINESE MODERN ART IN THE POST-MAO PERIOD: CURRENT DISCUSSION1990-2010 / Chapter 1. --- The 1990s as a demarcation period --- p.125 / Chapter 2. --- A review of art publications from 1990 to 2010 --- p.129 / Chapter 3) --- Problems encountered with current discussion --- p.148 / Chapter C) --- DISCUSSION OF "CHINESE MODERN ART" IN WIDER CONTEXT: A PERSPECTIVE FROM MEISHU ZAZHI 1979-1989 --- p.169 / Chapter 1. --- Ideological liberty and Two Hundreds policy in the art field --- p.173 / 「牡丹好，丁香也好」 --- p.179 / Chapter 2. --- Officialdom --- p.188 / Contributors to "Officialdom" --- p.190 / Changes in viewpoints between 1979 and 1989 --- p.197 / "Modern" qualities in the art of "Officialdom" --- p.201 / China's interpretation of modern art of foreign countries --- p.214 / Attacks on "New Trends in Art" --- p.225 / Chapter 3. --- Modernization of Chinese traditional painting --- p.229 / Contributors to the discussion about "Modernization of Chinese traditional painting --- p.235 / Changes in viewpoints between 1979 and 1989 --- p.236 / The path to modernization: different ways of reforming Chinese traditional painting --- p.242 / Chapter 4. --- New Trends in Art --- p.262 / Contributors to "New Trends in Art" --- p.264 / Changes in viewpoint between 1979 and 1989 --- p.267 / Chinese modern art: a sphere of ideological liberty --- p.276 / Chapter CHAPTER FOUR: --- EVALUATING THE DISCUSSION ON MODERN ART IN CHINA FROM 1979 TO 2010 IN LIGHT OF PIERRE BOURDIEU'S SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVES --- p.303 / Chapter A) --- "FIELD OF ART" AND "HABITUS": DISCUSSION OF MODERN ART FROM 1979 TO 1989 --- p.306 / Chapter B) --- "FIELD OF COMMERCE" AND "FIELD OF PUBLICATION": DISCUSSION OF MODERN ART FROM 1990 TO 2010 --- p.318 / Chapter CHAPTER FIVE: --- CONCLUSION --- p.323 / ILLUSTRATIONS --- p.336 / TABLES AND CHARTS --- p.398 / INTERVIEWS WITH LI SONGTAO, TANG QINGNIAN, WANG XIAOJIAN, AND FEI DAWEI --- p.408 / APPENDIX I --- p.436 / APPENDIX II --- p.447 / APPENDIX III --- p.727 / APPENDIX IV --- p.753 / BIBLIOGRAPHY --- p.787