我的征尘是星辰大海。。。
The dirt and dust from my pilgrimage forms oceans of stars...
-------当记忆的篇章变得零碎，当追忆的图片变得模糊，我们只能求助于数字存储的永恒的回忆
作者:黄教授
手机视频列表
丑雕塑和屎尿屁诗的核心是为什么人服务的问题
视频
音频
原始脚本
丑雕塑、屎尿诗与文艺阵地，为何人服务才是根本？你说的一针见血。 厦门街头那些粗鄙怪异的雕塑，文坛上靠回车键分行堆砌的屎尿屁诗歌。 看似领域不同，病根完全一致。 脱离人民，背弃审美，滥用名头，侵占公共话语权。 你那句写得差不是错，堂而皇之逼大众欣赏。 恬不知耻就是大错，道破了公共文艺最朴素的底线。 这种乱象绝非艺术创新，而是创作穷途末路的摆烂，是资本与圈层共谋的投机。 做不出震撼人心的美，就靠猎奇、粗鄙博眼球。 没有真情实感与思想深度，就把生理低俗当先锋。 缺乏真才实学，便借身份光环与资源垄断，把垃圾包装成艺术。 更可怕的是背后的利益链，炒作稀缺性、洗钱避税、利益输送。 让独一无二的丑成了投机工具，彻底亵渎了艺术的尊严。 从文坛怪象回看城市雕塑，逻辑完全相通。 公共空间不是私人猎奇场。 文艺作品更不是小圈子的自嗨玩物。 为什么人的问题是一个根本的问题、原则的问题？毛主席在延安文艺座谈会上的论断。 至今仍是照妖镜。 我们的文艺本该为最广大的人民服务，从人民生活中汲取灵感，传递真善美，凝聚精气神。 而当下这些乱象恰恰站在反面，拿着公共资源，顶着名家头衔，既不回应大众的质朴审美，也不承载时代的正向价值，更不关心普通人的精神需求。 他们吃着人民的饭，花着公共的钱，却在糟蹋公共空间，污染文艺生态，把文艺阵地变成了博丑逐利、圈层护短的自留地。 文艺阵地。 从不是真空地带，不为人民发声，就会被歪风邪气占领，不坚守美与正义，就会被粗鄙低俗侵蚀。 那些靠丑博出位、靠关系混圈子的所谓创作者。 本质上是丢掉了文艺工作者的初心，忘记了自己的衣食父母是人民。 他们追求的不是艺术，不是价值，而是流量、名利与灰色利益。 真正的艺术从不怕先锋，更不拒绝创新，但必须有底线、有温度、有敬畏。 城市雕塑应契合城市气质，抚慰大众目光。 诗歌应凝练语言，触动心灵，承载情怀，而不是以丑为美，以俗为酷，把无聊当个性，把粗鄙当深刻。 说到底，公共唯一的话语权必须还给人民。 唯有坚持为人民服务，让作品接受大众的检验，驱逐那些投机取巧、亵渎审美的乱象。 才能让街头有美景，文坛有清风，让文艺真正成为滋养人心、凝聚力量的精神食粮。
修正脚本
丑雕塑、屎尿诗与文艺阵地，为何人服务才是根本？你说得一针见血。 厦门街头那些粗鄙怪异的雕塑，文坛上靠回车键分行堆砌的屎尿屁诗歌。 看似领域不同，病根完全一致。 脱离人民，背弃审美，滥用名头，侵占公共话语权。 你那句“写得差不是错，堂而皇之逼大众欣赏，恬不知耻就是大错”，道破了公共文艺最朴素的底线。 这种乱象绝非艺术创新，而是创作穷途末路的摆烂，是资本与圈层共谋的投机。 做不出震撼人心的美，就靠猎奇、粗鄙博眼球。 没有真情实感与思想深度，就把生理低俗当先锋。 缺乏真才实学，便借身份光环与资源垄断，把垃圾包装成艺术。 更可怕的是背后的利益链，炒作稀缺性、洗钱避税、利益输送。 让独一无二的丑成了投机工具，彻底亵渎了艺术的尊严。 从文坛怪象回看城市雕塑，逻辑完全相通。 公共空间不是私人猎奇场。 文艺作品更不是小圈子的自嗨玩物。 为什么人的问题是一个根本的问题、原则的问题，毛主席在延安文艺座谈会上的论断，至今仍是照妖镜。 我们的文艺本该为最广大的人民服务，从人民生活中汲取灵感，传递真善美，凝聚精气神。 而当下这些乱象恰恰站在反面，拿着公共资源，顶着名家头衔，既不回应大众的质朴审美，也不承载时代的正向价值，更不关心普通人的精神需求。 他们吃着人民的饭，花着公共的钱，却在糟蹋公共空间，污染文艺生态，把文艺阵地变成了博丑逐利、圈层护短的自留地。 文艺阵地从不是真空地带，不为人民发声，就会被歪风邪气占领，不坚守美与正义，就会被粗鄙低俗侵蚀。 那些靠丑博出位、靠关系混圈子的所谓创作者，本质上是丢掉了文艺工作者的初心，忘记了自己的衣食父母是人民。 他们追求的不是艺术，不是价值，而是流量、名利与灰色利益。 真正的艺术从不怕先锋，更不拒绝创新，但必须有底线、有温度、有敬畏。 城市雕塑应契合城市气质，抚慰大众目光。 诗歌应凝练语言，触动心灵，承载情怀，而不是以丑为美，以俗为酷，把无聊当个性，把粗鄙当深刻。 说到底，公共话语权必须还给人民。 唯有坚持为人民服务，让作品接受大众的检验，驱逐那些投机取巧、亵渎审美的乱象。 才能让街头有美景，文坛有清风，让文艺真正成为滋养人心、凝聚力量的精神食粮。
英文翻译
Ugly sculptures, scatological poems, and the cultural battlefield—serving whom is the fundamental question? You hit the nail on the head. Those crude and grotesque sculptures on the streets of Xiamen, along with the scatological poems in the literary world that rely on line breaks for structure. Though they appear in different fields, the root cause is exactly the same. They are detached from the people, betray aesthetic values, abuse prestigious titles, and encroach on the public's right to discourse. Your remark, "Writing poorly is not a mistake, but forcing the public to appreciate it shamelessly and without any sense of shame is a grave error," lays bare the most basic底线 of public art. This chaos is by no means artistic innovation; it is a desperate act of creative bankruptcy, a投机行为 colluding between capital and cliques. Unable to create beauty that moves the soul, they resort to shock value and vulgarity to grab attention. Lacking genuine emotion and intellectual depth, they pass off physiological crudeness as avant-garde. Devoid of real talent, they rely on identity光环 and resource monopolies to package garbage as art. Even more terrifying is the chain of interests behind it:炒作 scarcity, money laundering, tax evasion, and the transfer of benefits. This turns unique ugliness into a tool for投机, utterly profaning the dignity of art. Looking back from the literary world's oddities to urban sculptures, the logic is completely consistent. Public space is not a private playground for the bizarre. Literary and artistic works are not mere toys for self-indulgent small circles. "The question of 'for whom' is a fundamental one, a matter of principle," as Chairman Mao asserted at the Yan'an Forum on Literature and Art—this judgment remains a mirror for discerning monsters today. Our art and literature should serve the broadest masses of the people, drawing inspiration from their lives, conveying truth, goodness, and beauty, and凝聚 spiritual strength. Yet these current混乱 phenomena stand on the opposite side: using public resources, bearing the titles of "masters," they neither respond to the质朴 aesthetic tastes of the masses, nor carry the positive values of the era, nor care about the spiritual needs of ordinary people. They eat the people's rice, spend public funds, yet they defile public spaces, pollute the artistic ecology, and turn the cultural battlefield into a private reserve for chasing ugliness and profit, shielding their own cliques. Cultural阵地 is never a vacuum; if it does not speak for the people, it will be occupied by歪风邪气; if it does not uphold beauty and justice, it will be eroded by crudeness and vulgarity. Those so-called creators who gain fame through ugliness and navigate circles through connections have essentially abandoned the初心 of literary and artistic workers, forgetting that their衣食父母 are the people. What they pursue is not art, not value, but traffic, fame, profit, and gray benefits. True art is never afraid of being avant-garde, nor does it reject innovation, but it must have底线, warmth, and reverence. Urban sculptures should align with the city's character and soothe the public's gaze. Poetry should refine language, touch the soul, and carry emotions, rather than taking ugliness as beauty, vulgarity as cool, boredom as individuality, and crudeness as profundity. In the end, the public's right to discourse must be returned to the people. Only by insisting on serving the people, letting works be tested by the masses, and驱散 those投机取巧, aesthetic-profaning混乱 phenomena, Can we have beautiful scenes on the streets and a clean breeze in the literary world, truly making art and literature the spiritual nourishment that nurtures the heart and凝聚 strength.
back to top