第十五章 艺术（第13/13页）

农村最传统的文化模式遭到连根拔起，其原因与其说是人口流动，不如说是兴办教育的结果。一旦群众接受了小学教育，传统文化便不可能再以口耳或面面相传的方式为基础。于是，文化遂分裂成识字者的高级文化（即占统治地位的文化）和不识字者的低级文化（即落后文化）。教育和全国官僚机构将农村居民变成精神分裂症患者的集合，他们的名字被分成两种，一是昵称和绰号，是邻居和亲戚称呼时用的（如“跛脚巴奎脱”），一是对学校、政府当局使用的正式姓名（如“弗朗西斯科·冈萨雷斯·洛佩斯”）。新生的一代实际上都能操两种语言。有越来越多的人，企图以“方言文学”的形式拯救古老语言［如安岑格鲁贝（Ludwig Anzengruber，1839—1889）写的农民话剧；巴恩斯（William Barnes，1800—1886）用多塞特（Dorset）方言写的诗；路透（Fritz Reuter，1810—1874）用德国北部方言写的自传以及1854年费利布里热（Félibrige）协会运动意欲复活的普罗旺斯文学］。但这对中产阶级罗曼蒂克的怀旧病、民粹主义或“自然主义”皆无吸引力。

用我们的标准来看，传统文化在这个阶段的衰落幅度还是比较小的。然而其意义相当重大，因为在这一时期，传统文化尚未从新兴无产阶级或城市反主流文化当中得到反馈（农村从来就没有出现过反主流文化）。因此，占统治地位的官方文化不可避免地与大获全胜的中产阶级等同起来，并凌驾在处于从属地位的广大群众之上。在这个时期，这种主从状态几乎是无法改变的。

[1] R. Wagner, ‘Kunst und Klima’, Gesammelte Schriften (Leipzig 1907), III, p.214.

[2] Cited in E. Dowden, Studies in Literature 1789-1877 (London 1892), p.404.

[3] Th. v. Frimmel, Lexicon der Wiener Gemäldesammlungen (A-L 1913-14); article: Ahrens.

[4] G. Reitlinger, The Economics of Taste (London 1961), chapter 6. I have relied much on this valuable work, which brings to the study of art a hard-headed financial realism suitable to our period.

[5] Asa Briggs, Victorian Cities (London 1963), pp.164 and 183.

[6] Reitlinger, op. cit.

[7] R. D. Altick, The English Common Reader (Chicago 1963), pp.355 and 388.

[8] Reitlinger, op. cit.

[9] F. A. Mumby, The House of Routledge (London 1934).

[10] M. V. Stokes, ‘Charles Dickens: A Customer of Coutts & Co.’, The Dickensian, 68 (1972), pp.17-30. I am indebted to Michael Slater for this reference.

[11] Mulhall, op. cit.; article: Libraries. A special note should be made of the British publiclibrary movement. Nineteen cities installed such free libraries in the 1850s, eleven in the 1860s, fifty-one in the 1870s (W. A. Munford,Edward Edwards [London 1963]).

[12] T. Zeldin, France 1848-1945 (Oxford 1974), I, p.310.

[13] G. Grundmann, ‘Schlösser und Villen des 19. Jahrhunderts von Unternehmem in Schlesien’, Tradition, 10, 4 (August 1965), pp.149-62.

[14] R. Wischnitzer, The Architecture of the European Synagogue (Philadelphia 1964), chapter X, especially pp.196 and 202-6.

[15] Gisèle Freund, Photographic und bürgerliche Gesellschaft (Munich 1968), p.92.

[16] Freund, op. cit., pp.94-6.

[17] Cited in Linda Nochlin (ed.), Realism and Tradition in Art (Englewood Cliffs 1966), pp.71 and 74.

[18] Gisèle Freund, Photographie et Société (Paris 1974), p.77.

[19] Freund, op. cit. (1968), p.111.

[20] Freund, op. cit. (1968), pp.112-13.

[21] For the question of artists and revolution in this period, see T. J. Clark, The Absolute Bourgeois (London 1973) and Image of the People:Gustave Courbet (London 1973).

[22] Nochlin, op. cit.., p.77.

[23] Nochlin, op. cit.., p.77.

[24] Nochlin, op. cit., p.53.

[25] Even in that lesser centre of Bohemia, Munich, the Münchner Kunstverein had about 4,500 members in the mid-1870s. P. Drey, Die wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen der Malkunst. Versuch einer Kunstökonomie (Stuttgart and Berlin 1910).

[26] ‘In art the handicraft is almost everything. Inspiration-yes, inspiration is a very pretty thing, but a little banale; it is so universal. Every bourgeois is more or less affected by a sunrise or sunset. He has a measure of inspiration.’Cited in Dowden, op. cit., p.405.