詮釋取徑之藝術研究方法

Hermeneutic Approach as an Art Research Methodology

賴雯淑(Wen-Shu Lai)；許雯婷(Wun-Ting Hsu)

詮釋學 ； 藝術研究方法 ； 詮釋歷程 ； hermeneutics ； art research ； methodology ； the hermeneutic process

藝術教育研究

22期（2011 / 12 / 01）

109 - 145

繁體中文

藝術可被視為人類在意義溝通上的重要途徑，而詮釋學作為一門意義理解與闡釋的方法學，兩者之間具有密切關聯性。因此對詮釋取徑內涵的釐清，有助於將之應用於藝術的質性研究，故本文分別從以下四個面向進行論述：（1）詮釋作為藝術研究方法的通切性；（2）詮釋學脈絡的梳理；（3）探討藝術與詮釋學概念的關聯，進而具體化藝術詮釋的歷程與模式；（4）反思詮釋取徑作為藝術研究方法之侷限性。筆者認為這方面的探討有助於理解詮釋學方法應用於藝術研究、藝術作品的理解與鑑賞教學等相關領域的貢獻。

Art is an important vehicle for human to communicate meaning. And hermeneutics is regarded as a methodology of understanding and interpreting meaning. Therefore, art and hermeneutics have an indispensible connection. Thus, it is profitable to explore the hermeneutic approach as a research methodology in visual arts. This paper includes the following aspects: (1) examine why hermeneutics is an appropriate methodology for art research today, (2) overview of the history of hermeneutics, (3) discuss the relations between art and hermeneutic concepts, then reify the hermeneutic process and mode in terms of art interpretation, and (4) reflect on the limitations of hermeneutics as a research approach in art research. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the hermeneutic approach is a suitable methodology in art research and the limitations of it. We believe that this paper is helpful to the understanding of hermeneutics as a research methodology in visual arts and its contribution in this field.

1. 陳榮華(2004)。海德格與高達美的時間概念。國立臺灣大學哲學評論，28，1-38。
   連結：
2. 劉仲嚴(2010)。藝術本位研究方法論與方法的議題和前景。藝術教育研究，19，1-23。
   連結：
3. 劉豐榮(2004)。視覺藝術創作研究之理論基礎探析：以質化研究觀點為基礎。藝術教育研究，8，73-94。
   連結：
4. Allen, G.(2000).Intertextuality.London, UK:Routledge.
5. Altheide, D. L.,Johnson, J. M.(1994).Criteria for assessing interpretative validity in qualitative research.Handbook of qualitative research,Thousand Oaks, CA:
6. Alvesson, M.,Sköldberg, K.(2000).Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
7. Bachelard, G.、龔卓軍譯、王靜慧譯(2003)。空間詩學。臺北=Taipei:張老師文化=Living Psychology。
8. Bamford, A.(2008).Slide presentation.Creativity and context: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Symposium conducted at the Interdisciplinary & Creative Arts Education Summit,Hong Kong:
9. Barthes, R.,Heath, S.(Trans.)(1977).Image music text.New York, NY:Hill and Wang.
10. Barthes, Roland、屠友祥譯(2004)。S/Z。臺北=Taipei:桂冠=Laureat。
11. Bleicher, J.(1980).Contemporary hermeneutics: Hermeneutics as method, philosophy, and critique.London, UK:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
12. Bontekoe, R.(1996).Dimensions of the hermeneutic circle.Atlantic Highlands, NJ:Humanities Press International.
13. Collini, S.(ed.)(1992).Interpretation and overinterpretation.Cambridge, MA:Cambridge University Press.
14. Crotty, M.(1998).The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
15. Danner, H.(1994).Methoden geisteswissenschaftlicher pädagogik.Munchen, DE:E. Reinhardt.
16. Eisner, E.(2006).Does arts-based research have a future?.Studies in Art Education,48(1),9-18.
17. Eisner, E. W.(1991).The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice.New York, NY:Macmillan.
18. Eisner, E. W.(ed.),Day, M. D.(ed.)(2004).Handbook of research and policy in art education.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrance Erlbaum Association.
19. Gadamer, H. G.,Barden, G.(Trans.),Cumming, J.(Trans.)(1975).Truth and method.London, UK:Sheed & Ward.
20. Gadamer, H. G.,Weinsheimer, J.(Trans.),Marshall, D. G.(Trans.)(1989).Truth and Method.New York, NY:The Continuum Publishing Company.
21. Gadamer, H. G.、洪漢鼎譯(2004)。真理與方法。上海=Shanghai:上海譯文=Shanghai Translation。
22. Gadamer, H. G.、洪漢鼎譯、夏鎮平譯(1995)。真理與方法：補充與索引。臺北=Taipei:時報文化=China Times Publishing。
23. Gergen, M.,Gergen, K.(2000).Qualitative inquiry: Tensions and transformations.Handbook of qualitative research,Thousand Oaks, CA:
24. Heidegger, M.,Hofstadter, A.(Trans.)(1971).Poetry, language, thought.New York, NY:Harper & Row.
25. Heidegger, M.,Macquarrie, J.(Trans.),Robinson, E.(Trans.)(1962).Being and time.New York, NY:Harper & Row.
26. Hertz, R. (ed.)(1997).Reflexivity and voice.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
27. Higgs, J.(2001).Charting standpoints in qualitative research.Critical moments in qualitative research,Oxford, UK:
28. Hilligoss, S.(1997).Robert Coles.New York, NY:Twayne Publishers.
29. Hirsch, E. D.(1967).Validity in interpretation.New Haven, CT:Yale University.
30. Hoy, D. C.(1978).The critical circle: Literature, history, and philosophical hermeneutics.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
31. Irwin, R.(1985).Being and circumstance: Notes toward a conditional art.Larkspur Landing, CA:The Lapis Press.
32. Klein, H. K.,Myers, M. D.(1999).A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems.MIS Quarterly,23(1),67-94.
33. Koch, T.(1996).Implementation of a hermeneutic inquiry in nursing: Philosophy, rigor, and representation.Journal of Advanced Nursing,24,174-184.
34. Koch, T.(1999).An interpretive research process: Revisiting phenomenological and hermeneutical approaches.Nurse Researcher,6(3),20-34.
35. Kögler, H. H.,Hendrickson, P.(Trans.)(1996).The power of dialogue: Critical hermeneutics after Gadamer and Foucault.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
36. Lincoln, Y. S.,Guba, E. G.(1985).Naturalistic inquiry.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
37. Madison, G. B.(1988).The hermeneutics of postmodernity: Figures and theme.Bloomington, MN:Indiana University Press.
38. Michelfelder, D. P. (ed.),Palmer, R. E. (ed.)(1989).Dialogue & deconstruction: The Gadamer-Derrida encounter.Albany, NY:State University of New York Press.
39. Packer, M. J.(1985).Hermeneutic inquiry in the study of human conduct.American Psychologist,40(10),1081-1093.
40. Palmer, R. E.(1969).Hermeneutics: Interpretation theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger, and Gadamer.Evanston, IL:Northwestern University Press.
41. Paterson, M.,Higgs, J.(2005).Using hermeneutics as a qualitative research approach in professional practice.The Qualitative Report,10(2),339-357.
42. Polanyi, M.(1966).The tacit dimension.Garden City, NY:Doubleday.
43. Reagan, C. E.(ed.),Stewart, D.(ed.)(1978).The philosophy of Paul Ricoeur. An anthology of his work.Boston, MA:Beacon.
44. Richardson, L.(1994).Writing: A method of inquiry.Handbook of qualitative research,Thousand Oaks, CA:
45. Ricoeur, P.(1976).Interpretation theory: Discourse and the surplus of meaning.Fort Worth, TX:Texas Christian University Press.
46. Ricoeur, P.,Blamey, K.(Trans.),Thompson, J. B.(Trans.)(1991).From text to action.Evanston, IL:Northwestern University Press.
47. Ricoeur, P.,Buchanan, E.(Trans.)(1967).The symbol of evil.Boston, MA:Beacon.
48. Ricoeur, P.,Czerny, R.(Trans.),Mclaughlin, K.(Trans.),Costello, J.(Trans.)(1978).The rule of metaphor: Multi-disciplinary studies of the creation of meaning in language.London, UK:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
49. Ricoeur, P.,McLaughlin, K. (Trans.)(1974).Existence and hermeneutics.The conflict of interpretations. Essays in hermeneutics,Evanston, IL:
50. Ricoeur, P.,McLaughlin, K.(Trans.),Pellauer, D.(Trans.)(1984).Time and narrative.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
51. Rorty, R.(1989).Contingency, irony and solidarity.Cambridge, MA:Cambridge University Press.
52. Schwandt, T. A.(2001).Dictionary of qualitative inquiry.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
53. Shahn, B.(1963).The shape of content.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
54. Simms, K.(2003).Paul Ricoeur.New York, NY:Routledge.
55. Sokolowski, R.、李維倫譯(2004)。現象學十四講。臺北=Taipei:心靈工坊=PsyGarden。
56. Sontag, S.(1964).Against interpretation, and other essays.New York, NY:Anchor Books.
57. Steier, F.(ed.)(1991).Research and reflexivity.London, UK:Sage.
58. Steirer, F.(ed.)(1991).Research and reflexivity.London, UK:Sage.
59. Strauss, A.,Corbin, J.(1990).Basic of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures & techniques.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
60. Wilson, B.(1997).The second search: Metaphor, dimensions of meaning, and research topics in art education.Research methods and methodologies for art education,Reston, VA:
61. Zurmuehlen, M.(1990).Studio art: Praxis, symbol, presence.Reston, VA:National Art Education Association.
62. 王怡婷(2007)。國立交通大學應用藝術研究所=National Chiao Tung University, Graduate School of Applied Arts。
63. 何明鴻(2009)。國立交通大學應用藝術研究所=National Chiao Tung University, Graduate School of Applied Arts。
64. 李建盛(2002)。理解事件與文本意義：文學詮釋學。上海=Shanghai:上海譯文=Shanghai Translation。
65. 李新敏(2005)。國立交通大學應用藝術研究所=National Chiao Tung University, Graduate School of Applied Arts。
66. 洪漢鼎編(2002)。詮釋學經典文選（上）。臺北=Taipei:桂冠=Laureate Book。
67. 洪漢鼎編(2002)。詮釋學經典文選（下）。臺北=Taipei:桂冠=Laureate Book。
68. 洪漢鼎(2008)。當代哲學詮釋學導論。臺北=Taipei:五南=Wu-Nan。
69. 殷鼎(1990)。理解的命運。臺北=Taipei:東大=Dong Da。
70. 國立中正大學教育學研究所編(2000)。質的研究方法。高雄=Kaohsiung:麗文=Liwen。
71. 陳榮華(2003)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告,行政院國家科學委員會=National Science Council。
72. 彭启福(2005)。理解之思：詮釋學初論。安徽=Anhui:安徽人民出版社=Anhui People's Publishing House。
73. 馮品佳編、趙順良編(2011)。「洞」見：視覺文化與美學。臺北=Taipei:書林=Bookman Books。
74. 樊柯(2009)。文化理解的效果歷史事件：一種本體論的詮釋。南陽師範學院學報（社會科學版），8(11)，61-63。
75. 潘德榮(1999)。詮釋學導論。臺北=Taipei:五南=Wu-Nan。
76. 賴雯淑(2008)。威廉‧肯胥居「Drawings for Projection」之美學脈絡。國際藝術教育學刊，6(2)，18-24。
77. 嚴平編(1997)。加達默爾集。上海=Shanghai:上海遠東=Shanghai Far East。

1. 賴雯淑(2022)。六燃國際互動劇場《無／非紀念碑》的另類歷史書寫。文化研究，34，109-148。
2. 賴雯淑、吳欣怡(2013)。論雪潤•內夏特作品中的三重隱喻：以其劇情電影“Women Without Men＂為探究起點。藝術評論，25，125-159。
3. 浦莉安(2021)。博物館新媒體藝術之展示研究－以國立故宮博物院為例。檔案半年刊，20(2)，104-113。