Aesthetic Analysis of the Reconstruction Paths of “Fusion Theory” and “Harmonization Theory”: The Suspension of “Yi”in the Modernization Transformation of 20th Century Chinese Art

Abstract

In the first half of the twentieth century, driven by the art revolution, Chinese art faced the dual pressures of the Western discourse system’s impact and the modernization transformation. Xu Beihong and Lin Fengmian, as representatives of early French-educated Chinese artists, proposed two distinct but similar paths of traditional transformation—“Fusion Theory”（融合论） and “Harmonization Theory.”(调和论)Xu Beihong adopted the concept of “technical priority” to reform traditional painting through Western realism, creating a system of “realistic ink painting.” His“Fusion Theory”in art practice responded to the mainstream narrative of modernization and national salvation, but it objectively led to the neglect of the aesthetic realm of“Yi”(意）in literati painting and the “dilution of Yi”(淡意) in the development of modern Chinese art. Lin Fengmian, on the other hand, based his approach on the Chinese aesthetic subjectivity, proposing the “Harmonization Theory” to achieve a deep integration of Chinese and Western art forms at the level of formal language, while creating new art for the times. By analyzing both artists’ practices within the aesthetic and philosophical frameworks of Shi Tao’s(石涛)“Yi hua Theory”(一画论) and Mou Zongsan's(牟宗三)interpretation of Neo-Confucianism, this paper explores the contributions and limitations of “Fusion Theory” in relation to the psychological separation of “Yi”and the “Harmonization Theory” as an independent response to the mainstream narrative. Through an aesthetic analysis of these two paths, this paper examines the predicament faced by the traditional aesthetic category of “Yi”in the context of the drastic modernization transformation of the twentieth century.