人書之際，本末之辨：趙壹《非草書》論技藝與人的限度

The Borderline between the Human and the Calligraphy, and the Distinction between the Fundamentals and the Ancillaries: Techniques and Human Limits in Zhao Yi's Against Cursive Calligraphy

《非草書》是中國古代第一篇書論，也是第一篇非議草書的書論。後世論者為了捍衛藝術學科價值、肯定審美意識自覺，多指責《非草書》以道德非難藝術、以實用凌駕審美。然而若從當代學界試圖對知識分科與泛美學化的文化現象進行反省的角度觀之，《非草書》或許不應被理解為審美覺識有所不足的反動言論，反而應視之為在書法藝術化的早期，即嘗試對此一文化現象與發展趨勢進行批判的先見之作。本文認為《非草書》指出：藝術的誕生來自技術對其自身的本源遺忘，技術的誕生則來自人對其自身的本源遺忘。因此，藝術的誕生或許並不意味著人的覺醒，而是對人性的徹底遺忘。草書的藝術化，則意味著技術已經觸及人的限度，並迫使人對其未來做出決斷。

Written during the Eastern Han period, Against Cursive Calligraphy, being the very first Chinese essay on calligraphy, is the earliest documented criticism of cursive calligraphy. To affirm their aesthetic awareness, later scholars have defended the arts by accusing Against Cursive Calligraphy of imposing a moral framework, which privileges practicality over aesthetics, on cursive calligraphy. Nevertheless, this article argues that Against Cursive Calligraphy should not be understood as a denounciation of calligraphy due to a lack of aesthetic awareness. Rather, it should be interpreted reflectively based on the examination of pan-aesthetic cultural phenomen and the division of disciplines. In this light, Against Cursive Calligraphy is indeed ahead of its time due to its accentuation of the cursive's cultural development during the budding aesthetic progession of calligraphy. According to Against Cursive Calligraphy, the birth of art originates from techniques without traces of their origin, and the birth of techniques originates from humans who leave their origins behind. Hence, this article argues that the birth of art is not directly linked to human awareness, but is connected to the absence of humanity. Furthermore, the development of cursive calligraphy indicates how techniques challenged the human limits and forced people to reassess and determine their future.