CHAPTER 21  第 21 章

1794

On the Picturesque, &c. 关于风景如画等

There is no country, I believe (if we except China) where the art of laying out grounds is so much cultivated as it now is in England. Formerly the embellishments of a place were confined to the garden, or a small space near the mansion; while the park, with all its timber and thickets, was left in a state of wealthy neglect: but now these embellishments extend over a whole district; and as they give a new and peculiar character to the general face of the country, it is well worth considering whether they give a natural and a beautiful one, and whether the present system of
我相信，没有一个国家（如果中国除外的话）的园林艺术像英国现在这样发达。以前，一个地方的点缀仅限于花园或宅邸附近的一小块地方；而公园及其所有的木材和灌木丛，则处于一种富裕的被忽视状态：但现在，这些点缀遍布整个地区；由于它们给国家的总体面貌带来了新的独特特征，因此很值得考虑它们是否带来了自然而美丽的特征，以及目前的系统是否给人们带来了自然而美丽的特征。

improving (to use a short though often an inaccurate term) is founded on any just principles of taste.
改善（用一个简短但往往不准确的词来形容）是建立在任何公正的品味原则之上的。

In order to examine this question, the first enquiry will naturally be, whether there is any standard to which works of this sort can be referred; any authority higher than that of the persons who have gained most reputation by those works? I think there is a standard; there are authorities of an infinitely higher kind; the authorities of those great artists who have most diligently studied the beauties of nature, both in their grandest and most general effects, and in their minutest detail; who have observed every variety of form and of color, have been able to select and combine, and then, by the magic of their art, to fix upon the canvas all these various beauties.
要研究这个问题，首先要问的自然是，是否有任何标准可以作为这类作品的参照；是否有任何权威高于通过这些作品获得最大声誉的人的权威？我认为是有标准的；有更高的权威；有那些伟大艺术家的权威，他们最勤奋地研究大自然的美，无论是最宏大、最普遍的效果，还是最细微的细节；他们观察各种形式和色彩，能够进行选择和组合，然后通过他们艺术的魔力，将所有这些不同的美固定在画布上。

But, however highly I may think of the art of painting, compared with that of improving, nothing can be farther from my intention (and I wish to impress it in the strongest manner on the reader’s mind) than to recommend the study of pictures in preference to that of nature, much less to the exclusion of it. Whoever studies art alone, will have a narrow pedantic manner of considering all objects, and of referring them solely to the minute and particular purposes of that art to which his attention has been particularly directed; this is what improvers have done: and if every thing is to be referred to art, at least let it be referred to one whose variety, compared to the monotony of what is called improvement, appears infinite, but which again falls as short of the boundless variety of the mistress of all art.
但是，无论我对绘画艺术的评价有多高，与对改良艺术的评价有多高，我的本意（而且我希望以最强烈的方式让读者记住这一点）都不会是建议研究绘画而不是研究自然，更不是排斥自然。任何只研究艺术的人，都会以一种狭隘迂腐的方式来考虑所有对象，并将它们仅仅归结为他特别关注的那门艺术的微小而特殊的目的；这就是改良者的所作所为：如果每一件事都要归结为艺术，至少让它归结为一种艺术，与所谓改良的单调相比，它的多样性似乎是无限的，但与所有艺术的女主人的无限多样性相比，它又是不足的。

The use, therefore, of studying pictures is not merely to make us acquainted with the combinations and effects that are contained in them, but to guide us by means of those general heads (as they may be called) of composition, in our search of the numberless and untouched varieties and beauties of nature; for as he who studies art only will have a confined taste, so he who looks at nature only will have a vague and unsettled one; and in this more extended sense I should interpret the Italian proverb, “Chi s’insegna, ha un pazzo per maestro: He is a fool who does not profit by the experience of others.”
因此，研究图画的用处不仅仅是让我们熟悉图画中的组合和效果，而是通过那些一般的构图要点（可称之为构图要点）来引导我们寻找大自然中无数未经雕琢的品种和美景；因为只研究艺术的人的品味有限，所以只观察大自然的人的品味也会模糊不清；在这个更广泛的意义上，我应该解释意大利谚语："Chi s'insegna, ha un pazzo per maestro"：不从他人经验中获益的人是傻瓜"。

We are therefore to profit by the experience contained in pictures, but not to content ourselves with that experience only; nor are we to consider even those of the highest class as absolute and infallible standards, but as the best and only ones we have; as compositions, which, like those of the great classical authors, have been consecrated by long uninterrupted admiration, and which therefore have a similar claim to influence our judgment, and to form our taste in all that is within their province. These are the reasons for studying copies of nature, though the original is before us, that we may not lose the benefit of what is of such great moment in all arts and sciences, the accumulated experience of past ages; and, with respect to the art of improving, we may look upon pictures as a set of experiments of the different ways in which trees, buildings, water, &c. may be disposed, grouped, and accompanied in the most beautiful and striking manner, and in every style, from the most simple and rural to the grandest and most ornamental: many of those objects, that are scarcely marked as they lie scattered over the face of nature, when brought together in the compass of a small space of canvas, are forcibly impressed upon the eye, which by that means learns how to separate, to select, and combine.
因此，我们要从图画中所包含的经验中获益，但不能仅仅满足于这种经验；我们也不能将最高级的图画视为绝对和无懈可击的标准，而应将其视为我们所拥有的最好的和唯一的标准；就像那些伟大的古典作家的作品一样，这些作品因长期不间断的欣赏而被赋予了神圣的意义，因此，它们同样有资格影响我们的判断，并在其范围内形成我们的品位。这些都是我们研究自然摹本的理由，尽管原作就在我们面前，这样我们才不会失去对所有艺术和科学都至关重要的东西，即过去时代积累的经验；关于改进艺术，我们可以把绘画看作是对树木、建筑、水等不同方式的一系列实验，这些方式可以是布置、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合、组合等。这些物体散布在大自然的各个角落，几乎没有任何特征，但当它们被集中在一块小小的画布上时，就会给眼睛留下深刻的印象，从而学会如何分离、选择和组合。

Who can doubt whether Shakespeare and Fielding had not infinitely more amusement from society, in all its various views, than common observers? I believe it can be as little doubted, but that the having read such authors must give any man (however acute his penetration) more enlarged views of human nature in general, as well as a more intimate acquaintance with particular characters, than he would have had from the observation of nature only; that many groups of characters, many combinations of incidents, which might otherwise have escaped his notice, would forcibly strike him, from the recollection of scenes and passages from such writers; that in all these cases the pleasure we receive from what passes in real life is rendered infinitely more poignant by a resemblance to what we have read or have seen on the stage. But will any man argue from thence that these characters and incidents have no intrinsic merit, but merely that which is derived from their having been made use of by great and admired authors? The parallel between this and the assistance which painting gives towards an accurate as well as a comprehensive view of nature is so obvious as hardly to require pointing out.
谁能怀疑莎士比亚和菲尔丁从社会的各种观点中获得的乐趣不比普通观察者多得多呢？我相信这一点毋庸置疑，但读过这些作家作品的人，无论其洞察力多么敏锐，都会对一般人性有更广阔的认识，对特定人物也会有更深入的了解，这比他仅仅观察自然界要好得多；在所有这些情况下，我们从现实生活中获得的乐趣，会因为与我们所读到的或在舞台上看到的相似而变得更加强烈。但是，有人会因此而说，这些人物和事件没有内在的优点，而只是因为它们曾被伟大的、受人敬仰的作家所利用？这与绘画帮助人们准确而全面地认识自然之间的相似之处是如此明显，几乎无需指出。

I am therefore persuaded that those men’s minds will be the most amused (and perhaps not the least usefully employed) to whom “all the world’s a stage,” who remark wherever they go (and habit will give a rapid and unobserved facility in doing it) not only the characters of all individuals, but their effect on each other. Such an observer will not divide what passes into scenes and chapters, and be pleased with it in proportion as it will do for a novel or a play, but he will be pleased on the same principles as Shakespeare or Fielding would have been. This appears to me a true and exact statement of the mutual relation that painting and nature bear to each other.
因此，我相信，对于那些 "全世界都是舞台 "的人来说，他们的思想是最有趣的（或许也不是最无用的），他们无论走到哪里（习惯会让他们在不经意间迅速注意到这一点），不仅会注意到每个人的性格，还会注意到他们相互之间的影响。这样的观察者不会像小说或戏剧那样，把所经过的事情分成场景和章节，并按比例对其感到满意，但他会像莎士比亚或菲尔丁那样按同样的原则感到满意。在我看来，这是对绘画与自然相互关系的真实而准确的表述。

Had the art of improving been cultivated for as long a time, and upon as settled principles, as that of painting, and were there extant various works of genius, which, like those of the other art, had stood the test of ages (though from the great change which the growth and decay of trees must produce in the original design of the artist, this is hardly possible) there would not be the same necessity of referring and comparing the works of reality to those of imitation; but as the case stands at present, the only models that approach to perfection, the only fixed and unchanging selections from the works of nature, united with those of art, are in the pictures and designs of the most eminent masters.
如果改良艺术也能像绘画艺术那样经过长时间的发展，并遵循同样固定的原则，而且现存的各种天才作品也能像其他艺术作品一样经受住岁月的考验（不过，由于树木的生长和腐朽必然会对艺术家的原始设计产生巨大的变化，这几乎是不可能的），那么就没有必要将现实作品与模仿作品进行比较了；但就目前的情况而言，唯一接近完美的模型，唯一固定不变的自然作品与艺术作品的结合，只有最杰出的大师们的画作和设计。

It may be objected, that there are many pleasing circumstances in nature, which, in painting, would appear flat and insipid, as there are others that have a striking effect in a picture, which yet in nature (by a common observer at least) would be unnoticed, or even disliked; but, however true this may be in particular instances, the great leading principles of the one art, as general composition-grouping the separate parts-harmony of tints-unity of character, are equally applicable to the other: I may add also, what is so very essential to the painter, though at first sight it seems hardly within the province of the improver-breadth and effect of light and shade.
也许有人会反对说，自然界中有许多令人愉悦的景象，在绘画中会显得平淡无奇，就像有些景象在画中会产生惊人的效果，但在自然界中（至少在普通观察者看来）却不会被注意到，甚至会被讨厌；但是，无论在特定的情况下这是多么正确，一种艺术的主要原则，如总体构图--将不同部分组合起来--色调的和谐--特征的统一，同样适用于另一种艺术：此外，我还想补充一点，那就是对画家来说非常重要的东西，尽管乍看起来它几乎不属于改良者的范畴--明暗的广度和效果。

Nothing can be more directly at war with all these principles (founded as they are in truth and nature) than the present system of laying out of grounds. A painter, or
没有什么比现在的地面铺设系统更直接地违背了所有这些原则（因为它们都建立在真理和自然之上）。画家或
whoever views objects with a painter’s eye, ${}^1$${}^1$^(1){ }^{1} looks with indifference, if not with disgust, at the clumps, the belts, the made water, and the eternal smoothness and sameness of a finished place; an improver, on the other hand, considers these as the most perfect embellishments, as the last finishing touches that nature can receive from art; and consequently must think the finest composition of Claude (and I mention him as the most ornamented of all the great masters) comparatively rude and imperfect; though he probably might allow, in Mr. Brown’s phrase, that it had “capabilities.”
凡是用画家的眼光来看待事物的人， ${}^1$${}^1$^(1){ }^{1} 即使不厌恶，也会漠不关心地看待那些团块、带子、人造水，以及已完成的地方永远的平滑和千篇一律；另一方面，改良者认为这些都是最完美的点缀，是大自然从艺术中得到的最后的修饰；因此，他一定会认为克劳德（我说他是所有大师中最具装饰性的一位）最精美的作品相对来说是粗糙和不完美的；不过，用布朗先生的话说，他可能会承认，这幅画是有瑕疵的。用布朗先生的话说，这幅画有 "能力"。

It seems to me, that the neglect, which prevails in the works of modern improvers, of all that is picturesque, is owing to their exclusive attention to high polish and flowing lines, the charms of which they are so engaged in contemplating, as to make them overlook two of the most fruitful sources of human pleasure; the first, that great and universal source of pleasure, variety, whose power is independent of beauty, but without which even beauty itself soon ceases to please; the other, intricacy, a quality which, though distinct from variety, is so connected and blended with it, that the one can hardly exist without the other.
在我看来，现代改良主义者的作品中普遍存在着对一切如诗如画的东西的忽视，这是因为他们只关注高超的技巧和流畅的线条，他们太专注于欣赏线条的魅力了，以至于忽略了人类快乐的两个最丰富的源泉；第一种是伟大而普遍的快乐源泉--多样性，它的力量独立于美感，但如果没有它，即使美感本身也很快就不再令人愉悦；另一种是复杂性，这种品质虽然与多样性不同，但却与多样性紧密相连、相互融合，以至于两者缺一不可。

According to the idea I have formed of it, intricacy in landscape might be defined, that disposition of objects which, by a partial and uncertain concealment, excites and nourishes curiosity. ${}^2$${}^2$^(2){ }^{2} Variety can hardly require a definition, though, from the practice of many layers-out of ground, one might suppose it did. Upon the whole, it appears to me, that as intricacy in the disposition, and variety in the forms, the tints, and the lights and shadows of objects, are the great characteristics of picturesque scenery; so monotony and baldness are the greatest defects of improved places.
根据我对它的理解，风景中的错综复杂可以定义为：通过部分和不确定的隐藏，激发和滋养好奇心的物体布局。 ${}^2$${}^2$^(2){ }^{2} 多样性几乎不需要定义，尽管从许多层出不穷的做法来看，人们可能会认为它需要定义。总的来说，在我看来，正如物体的布局、形态、色调、光影的错综复杂和丰富多彩是风景如画的最大特点一样，单调和乏味也是改良后的地方的最大缺陷。

Nothing would place this in so distinct a point of view as a comparison between some familiar scene in its natural and picturesque, and in what would be its improved state, according to the present principles of gardening. All painters, who have imitated the more confined scenes of nature, have been fond of making studies from old neglected bye roads and hollow ways; and, perhaps, there are few spots that, in so small a compass, have a greater variety of that sort of beauty called
没有什么比把一些熟悉的景物的自然景色和如诗如画的景色，与按照目前的园艺原则进行改良后的景色进行比较，更能说明问题了。所有画家在模仿大自然中较为狭窄的景物时，都喜欢从过去被人忽视的小路和空地上进行研究。

picturesque; but, I believe, the instances are very rare of painters, who have turned out volunteers into a gentleman’s walk or drive, either when made between artificial banks, or when the natural sides or banks have been improved. I shall endeavor to examine from whence it happens, that a picturesque eye looks coldly on what is very generally admired, and discovers a thousand interesting objects where a common eye sees nothing but ruts and rubbish; and whether the pleasure of the one, and the indifference of the other, arise from the causes I have assigned.
但我相信，很少有画家把志愿者变成绅士的散步道或车道，无论是在人工河岸之间，还是在天然河岸或河岸经过改良之后。我将努力研究一下，究竟是什么原因导致如画的眼睛冷漠地看待一般人所欣赏的事物，并发现了无数有趣的事物，而普通人的眼睛却只能看到车辙和垃圾；究竟是什么原因导致了前者的愉悦和后者的冷漠。

There are few words whose meaning has been less accurately determined than that of the word Picturesque.
没有几个词的含义比 "风景如画 "一词的含义更不准确了。

In general, I believe, it is applied to every object, and every kind of scenery, which has been, or might be represented with good effect in painting, and that without any exclusion. But, considered as a separate character, it has never yet been accurately distinguished from the sublime and the beautiful; though as no one has ever pretended that they are synonymous, (for it is sometimes used in contradistinction to them) such a distinction must exist.
我认为，一般来说，它适用于每一个物体和每一种景物，这些物体和景物已经或可能在绘画中得到很好的表现，而且没有任何排斥。但是，作为一种独立的特征，它从未被准确地与崇高和美丽区分开来；尽管没有人声称它们是同义词（因为它有时被用来与它们区分开来），但这样的区分是必然存在的。

Mr. Gilpin, from whose very ingenious and extensive observations on this subject I have received great pleasure and instruction, has given his sanction to this common idea, by defining picturesque objects to be those “which please from some quality capable of being illustrated in painting,” ${}^3$${}^3$^(3){ }^{3} or, as he again defines it in his Letter to Sir Joshua Reynolds "such objects as are proper subjects for painting."4 Both these definitions seems to me (what may perhaps appear a contradiction) at once too vague and too confined; for though we are not to expect any definition to be so accurate and comprehensive, as both to supply the place and stand the test of investigation, yet if it does not in some degree separate the thing defined from all others, it differs little from any general truth on the same subject. For instance, it is very true, that picturesque objects do please from some quality capable of being illustrated in painting; but so also does every object that is represented in painting if it pleases at all, otherwise it would not have been painted; and from hence we ought to conclude (what certainly is not meant) that all objects which please in pictures are therefore picturesque, for no distinction or exclusion is made. Were any other person to define picturesque objects to be those which please from some striking effect of form, color, or light and shadow, such a definition would indeed give but a very indistinct idea of the thing defined; but, though hardly more vague than the others, it would be much less confined, for it would not have an exclusive reference to art.
吉尔平先生在这个问题上的观察非常巧妙和广泛，我从他那里得到了极大的乐趣和教益，他认可了这种常见的想法，将风景如画的物体定义为 "从某种品质上能够在绘画中得到体现的物体"， ${}^3$${}^3$^(3){ }^{3} 或者，正如他在给约书亚-雷诺兹爵士的信中再次定义的那样，"这些物体是绘画的适当主题"。"4在我看来，这两个定义（也许看起来有些矛盾）都过于含糊，过于局限；因为尽管我们不能期望任何定义都是如此准确和全面，既能满足需要，又能经得起研究的检验，但如果它不能在某种程度上将被定义的事物与所有其他事物区分开来，那么它与同一主题的任何一般真理就没有什么区别。例如，画中之物确实因其某种能够在绘画中表现出来的特质而讨人喜欢，这是非常正确的；但在绘画中表现出来的每个物体也是如此，如果它讨人喜欢的话，否则它就不会被画出来；因此，我们应该得出这样的结论（当然不是这个意思），即在绘画中讨人喜欢的所有物体因此都是画中之物，因为并没有做出任何区分或排除。如果有其他人将风景如画的物体定义为那些因形式、色彩或光影的某种引人注目的效果而令人愉悦的物体，那么这样的定义的确会让人对所定义的事物产生非常模糊的概念；不过，虽然它并不比其他定义更模糊，但它的局限性却要小得多，因为它并不专指艺术。

I hope to shew, in the course of this work, that the picturesque has a character not less separate and distinct than either the sublime or the beautiful, nor less
我希望在这部作品中说明，风景如画的特性并不逊于崇高或优美，也不逊于

independent of the art of painting. It has indeed been pointed out and illustrated by that art, and is one of its most striking omaments; but has not beauty been pointed out and illustrated by that art also?
独立于绘画艺术之外。绘画艺术确实已经指出并说明了这一点，而且这也是绘画艺术最显著的特点之一；但是，绘画艺术不也已经指出并说明了美吗？

Examine the forms of those painters who lived before the age of Raphael, or in a country where the study of the antique (operating as it did at Rome on minds highly prepared for its influence) had not yet taught them to separate what is beautiful from the general mass; we might almost conclude that beauty did not then exist; yet those painters were capable of exact imitation, but not of selection. Examine grandeur of form in the same manner; look at the dry meager forms of A. Durer (a man of genius even in Raphael’s estimation), of P. Perugino, A. Mantegna, &c. and compare them with those of M. Angelo and Raphael: Nature was not more dry and meager in Germany or Perugia than at Rome. - Compare the landscapes and back grounds of such artists with those of Titian; Nature was not changed, but a mind of a higher cast, and instructed by the experience of all who went before rejected minute detail, and pointed out, by means of such selections and such combinations, as were congenial to its own sublime conceptions, in what forms, in what colors, and in what effects, grandeur in landscape consisted. Can it then be doubted but, that grandeur and beauty have been pointed out and illustrated by painting as well as picturesqueness? ${}^5$${}^5$^(5){ }^{5} Yet, would it be a just definition of sublime or of beautiful objects to say, that they were such (and, let the words be taken in their most liberal construction) as pleased from some quality capable of being illustrated in painting, or that were proper subjects for that art? The ancients, indeed, not only referred beauty of form to painting, but even beauty of color; and the poet who could describe his mistress’s complexion, by comparing it to the tints of Apelles’s pictures, must have thought that beauty of every kind was highly illustrated by the art he referred to.
看看那些生活在拉斐尔时代之前的画家的作品，或者是生活在一个研究古代作品（在罗马，这种研究对人们的思想影响很大）的国家的画家的作品，他们还没有学会把美的东西从一般的作品中分离出来；我们几乎可以得出结论，当时美是不存在的；然而，这些画家能够精确地模仿，却不能选择。以同样的方式审视宏伟的形式；看看杜勒（A. Durer，即使在拉斐尔的评价中也是一位天才）、佩鲁吉诺（P. Perugino）、曼特尼亚（A. Mantegna）等人干瘪乏味的形式，并将它们与安杰洛先生和拉斐尔的作品进行比较：德国或佩鲁吉亚的大自然并不比罗马更干瘪乏味。- 将这些艺术家的风景画和背景画与提香的作品进行比较；大自然并没有改变，而是一颗更高尚的心灵，在前人的经验指导下，摒弃了细枝末节，通过与自身崇高理想相适应的选择和组合，指出了风景画中的壮丽包括哪些形式、哪些色彩和哪些效果。那么，人们还能怀疑，宏伟和美丽是通过绘画和图画表现出来的吗？ ${}^5$${}^5$^(5){ }^{5} 然而，如果说崇高或美丽的对象是这样的（让我们以最自由的方式来理解这些词语），即它们因某种能够在绘画中加以说明的品质而令人愉悦，或者它们是绘画艺术的适当题材，这难道是对崇高或美丽对象的公正定义吗？ 事实上，古人不仅将形式美归结为绘画美，甚至还将色彩美归结为绘画美；能够通过将其情妇的肤色与阿佩莱斯画作的色调进行比较来描述其肤色的诗人，一定认为他所提到的艺术高度体现了各种美。

The principles of those two leading characters in nature, the sublime and the beautiful, have been fully illustrated and discriminated by a great master; but even when I first read that most original work, I felt that there were numberless objects which give great delight to the eye and yet differ as widely from the beautiful as from the sublime. The reflections I have since been led to make have convinced me that these objects form a distinct class, and belong to what may properly be called the picturesque.
大自然中的两大主角--崇高和美丽--的原理已被一位伟大的大师充分说明和辨别；但即使在我第一次读到那本最具独创性的著作时，我也觉得有无数的物体给人带来极大的视觉享受，但它们与美丽和崇高的差别同样巨大。后来的思考让我确信，这些物体形成了一个独特的类别，属于可以被恰当地称为 "风景如画 "的范畴。

That term (as we may judge from its etymology) is applied only to objects of sight, and that indeed in so confined a manner as to be supposed merely to have a reference to the art from which it is named. I am well convinced, however, that the name and reference only are limited and uncertain, and that the qualities which make objects picturesque are not only as distinct as those which make them beautiful or
这个词（我们可以从它的词源中判断出来）只用于视觉对象，而且是以如此有限的方式，以至于被认为仅仅是指其命名的艺术。然而，我深信，这个名称和所指都是有限的、不确定的，使物体如画的特质不仅与使物体美丽或悦目的特质一样不同，而且还与使物体如画的特质一样不同。

sublime, but are equally extended to all our sensations, by whatever organs they are received; and that music (though it appears like a solecism) may be as truly picturesque, according to the general principles of picturesqueness, as it may be beautiful or sublime, according to those of beauty or sublimity.
音乐（尽管它看起来像是一种独奏曲）根据一般的绘画性原则，可以是真正如诗如画的，就像它根据美或崇高的原则，可以是优美或崇高的一样。

There is, indeed, a general harmony and correspondence in all our sensations when they arise from similar causes, though they affect us by means of different senses; and these causes (as Mr. Burke has admirably explained ${}^6$${}^6$^(6){ }^{6} ) can never be so clearly ascertained when we confine our observations to one sense only.
事实上，当我们的所有感觉产生于相似的原因时，尽管它们是通过不同的感官影响我们的，但它们却具有普遍的和谐性和对应性；而这些原因（正如伯克先生令人钦佩地解释过的那样 ${}^6$${}^6$^(6){ }^{6} ），当我们把观察局限于一种感官时，是永远无法如此清楚地确定的。

I must here observe (and I wish the reader to keep it in his mind) that the enquiry is not in what sense certain words are used in the best authors, still less what is their common and vulgar use and abuse; but whether there are certain qualities which uniformly produce the same effects in all visible objects, and, according to the same analogy, in objects of hearing and of all the other senses; and which qualities (though frequently blended and united with others in the same object or set of objects) may be separated from them, and assigned to the class to which they belong.
在此我必须指出（我希望读者牢记这一点），我们要探究的不是某些词在最好的作者那里是什么意思，更不是它们通常和粗俗的用法和滥用；而是是否有某些特质在所有可见的物体上，以及根据同样的类比，在听觉和所有其他感官的物体上，都一致地产生同样的效果；这些特质（尽管在同一个物体或一组物体中经常与其他物体混合在一起）可以从它们中分离出来，并归入它们所属的类别。

If it can be shewn that a character composed of these qualities, and distinct from all others, does prevail through all nature; if it can be traced in the different objects of art and of nature, and appears consistent throughout, it surely deserves a distinct title; but with respect to the real ground of enquiry, it matters little whether such a character, or the set of objects belonging to it, is called beautiful, sublime, or picturesque, or by any other name, or by no name at all.
如果可以证明，由这些特质组成的、有别于所有其他特质的特征确实贯穿于整个自然界；如果可以在艺术和自然的不同对象中找到这种特征，并且自始至终都是一致的，那么它肯定值得一个独特的称谓；但就真正的研究基础而言，这种特征或属于这种特征的一组对象是否被称为美丽、崇高或风景如画，或被称为任何其他名称，或根本没有名称，都无关紧要。

Beauty is so much the most enchanting and popular quality, that it is often applied as the highest commendation to whatever gives us pleasure, or raises our admiration, be the cause what it will. Mr. Burke has pointed out many instances of these ill-judged applications, and of the confusion of ideas that result from them; but there is nothing more ill-judged, or more likely to create confusion (if we agree with Mr. Burke in his idea of beauty) than the joining of it to the picturesque, and calling the character by the title of Picturesque Beauty.?
美是最迷人、最受欢迎的品质，以至于人们常常把它作为最高的褒奖，用于任何给我们带来快乐或引起我们钦佩的事物，无论其原因是什么。伯克先生已经指出了许多这种错误应用的例子，以及由此造成的思想混乱；但是，没有什么比把它与 "风景如画 "联系在一起，并冠以 "风景如画之美 "的称号更错误，或更容易造成思想混乱（如果我们同意伯克先生对美的看法的话）？

In reality, the picturesque not only differs from the beautiful in those qualities Mr. Burke has so justly ascribed to it, but arises from qualities the most diametrically opposite.
实际上，风景如画不仅在伯克先生所赋予它的那些特质上不同于美，而且产生于截然相反的特质。

According to Mr. Burke, one of the most essential qualities of beauty is smoothness; now, as the perfection of smoothness is absolute equality and uniformity of
伯克先生认为，美最基本的特质之一就是光滑。

surface, wherever that prevails there can be but little variety or intricacy; as, for instance, in smooth level banks, on a small, or in naked downs, on a large scale. Another essential quality of beauty is gradual variation; that is (to make use of Mr. Burke’s expression) where the lines do not vary in a sudden and broken manner, and where there is no sudden protuberance. It requires but little reflection to perceive, that the exclusion of all but flowing lines cannot promote variety; and that sudden protuberances, and lines that cross each other in a sudden and broken manner, are among the most fruitful causes of intricacy.
例如，小到平滑的河岸，大到裸露的荒地。美感的另一个基本特征是渐变，即（借用伯克先生的说法）线条的变化不是突然的、破碎的，也没有突然的突起。只需稍加思考，我们就会发现，除了流畅的线条之外，其他所有线条都无法促进作品的多样性；而突兀的突起和突然断裂的线条相互交叉，则是造成作品错综复杂的最主要原因。

I am therefore persuaded, that the two opposite qualities of roughness, ${}^8$${}^8$^(8){ }^{8} and of sudden variation, joined to that of irregularity, are the most efficient causes of the picturesque.
因此我相信，粗糙和突然变化这两种相反的特质，再加上不规则的特质，是造成风景如画的最有效原因。

This, I think, will appear very clearly, if we take a view of those objects, both natural and artificial, that are allowed to be picturesque, and compare them with those which are as generally allowed to be beautiful.
我认为，如果我们把那些被认为是风景如画的自然和人工物体与那些被普遍认为是美丽的物体进行比较，就会非常清楚地看到这一点。

Picturesqueness, therefore, appears to hold a station between beauty and sublimity; and on that account, perhaps is more frequently and more happily blended with them both than they are with each other. It is, however, perfectly distinct from either; and first, with respect to beauty, it is evident, from all that has been said, that they are founded on very opposite qualities; the one on smoothness, ${}^9$${}^9$^(9){ }^{9} the other on
因此，"画意 "似乎介于 "美 "与 "崇高 "之间；因此，"画意 "也许比 "美 "与 "崇高 "更经常、更令人愉悦地融合在一起。然而，它与其中任何一种都截然不同；首先，就美而言，从前面所说的一切可以看出，它们建立在截然相反的特质之上；一种建立在平滑之上， ${}^9$${}^9$^(9){ }^{9} 另一种建立在纤细之上。

roughness;-the one on gradual, the other on sudden variation;-the one on ideas of youth and freshness, the other on that of age, and even of decay.
一个是渐变，另一个是突变；一个是青春和新鲜的概念，另一个是年龄的概念，甚至是衰败的概念。

But as most of the qualities of visible beauty (excepting color) are made known to us through the medium of another sense, the sight itself is hardly more to be attended to than the touch, in regard to all those sensations which are excited by beautiful forms; and the distinction between the beautiful and the picturesque will, perhaps, be most strongly pointed out by means of the latter sense. I am aware that this is liable to a gross and obvious ridicule; but for that reason none but gross and common-place minds will dwell upon it.
但是，由于大多数可见之美的特质（颜色除外）都是通过另一种感官的媒介让我们了解的，因此，就美丽的形式所激发的所有感觉而言，视觉本身并不比触觉更值得关注；而且，美丽与如画之间的区别或许可以通过后一种感官得到最有力的说明。我知道，这很容易引起粗俗而明显的嘲笑；但正因为如此，除了粗俗和平凡的头脑之外，没有人会去讨论这个问题。

Mr. Burke has observed, that “men are carried to the sex, in general, as it is the sex, and by the common law of nature; but they are attached to particulars by personal beauty;” ${}^{10}$${}^{10}$^(10){ }^{10} he adds, “I call beauty a social quality; for where women and men, and not only they, but when other animals give us a sense of joy and pleasure in beholding them (and there are many that do so) they inspire us with sentiments of tenderness and affection towards their persons; we like to have them near us, and we enter willingly into a kind of relation with them.”
伯克先生曾说过："一般来说，男人被性别所吸引，因为它是性别，是自然的共同法则；但他们被个人美所吸引，因为他们是特殊的。伯克先生说："一般来说，男人被性别所吸引，因为这是性别，也是自然界的共同法则；但他们被个人的美所吸引，因为他们是特殊的；" ${}^{10}$${}^{10}$^(10){ }^{10} 他还说："我把美称为一种社会品质；" ${}^{10}$${}^{10}$^(10){ }^{10} 他又说："我把美称为一种社会性品质；因为女人和男人，不仅是他们，而且当其他动物让我们在观赏他们时感到快乐和愉悦时（有许多动物都能做到这一点），他们会激发我们对他们的温柔和喜爱之情；我们喜欢让他们靠近我们，我们心甘情愿地与他们建立一种关系。"

These sentiments of tenderness and affection nature has taught us to express by caresses, by gentle pressure; these are the endearments we make use of (where sex is totally out of the question) to beautiful children, to beautiful animals, and even to things inanimate; and where the size and character (as in trees, buildings, &c.) excludes any such relation, still something of the same difference of sensation between them and rugged objects appears to subsist; that sensation however is diminished as the size of any beautiful object is increased; and as it approaches towards grandeur and magnificence, it recedes from loveliness.
大自然教会我们用爱抚和轻压来表达这些温柔和亲切的情感；这就是我们对美丽的孩子、美丽的动物、甚至无生命的东西所使用的爱称（在性别完全不存在问题的情况下）；在大小和特性（如树木、建筑物等）排除了任何这种关系的情况下，它们与粗犷的物体之间似乎仍然存在着某种相同的感觉差异；然而，这种感觉会随着任何美丽物体的大小增加而减弱。然而，当任何美丽物体的体积增大时，这种感觉就会减弱；当它接近宏伟壮观时，这种感觉就会远离可爱。

As the eye borrows many of its sensations from the touch, so that again seems to borrow others from the sight. Soft, fresh, and beautiful colors, though “not sensible to feeling as to sight,” give us an inclination to try their effect on the touch; whereas, if the color be not beautiful, that inclination, I believe, is always diminished, and, in objects merely picturesque, and void of all beauty, is rarely excited. ${}^{11}$${}^{11}$^(11){ }^{11}
就像眼睛从触觉中借用了许多感觉一样，触觉似乎也从视觉中借用了其他感觉。柔和、清新、美丽的色彩，虽然 "感觉不像视觉那样敏锐"，却让我们倾向于尝试它们对触觉的影响；而如果色彩并不美丽，我相信这种倾向总是会减弱，而且，对于仅仅是风景如画、毫无美感可言的物体，这种倾向也很少会被激发出来。 ${}^{11}$${}^{11}$^(11){ }^{11}

These are the principal circumstances by which the picturesque is separated from the beautiful. It is equally distinct from the sublime; for though there are some qualities common to them both, yet they differ in many essential points, and proceed from very different causes. In the first place, greatness of dimension ${}^{12}$${}^{12}$^(12){ }^{12} is a powerful cause of the sublime; the picturesque has no connection with dimension of any kind (in which it differs from the beautiful also) and is as often found in the smallest as in the largest objects. -The sublime being founded on principles of awe and terror, never descends to any thing light or playful; the picturesque, whose characteristics
这些就是将风景如画与美丽区分开来的主要原因。它与崇高同样不同；因为尽管它们都有一些共同的特质，但它们在许多基本点上是不同的，而且产生的原因也截然不同。首先，巨大的尺寸 ${}^{12}$${}^{12}$^(12){ }^{12} 是产生崇高的强大原因；而风景如画与任何尺寸都没有关系（在这一点上它也不同于美），它既存在于最小的物体中，也存在于最大的物体中。-崇高是建立在敬畏和恐怖的原则之上的，它从不向任何轻盈或俏皮的事物低头；风景如画的特点是

are intricacy and variety, is equally adapted to the grandest and to the gayest scenery.-Infinity is one of the most efficient causes of the sublime; the boundless ocean, for that reason, inspires awful sensations: to give it picturesqueness you must destroy that cause of its sublimity; for it is on the shape and disposition of its boundaries that the picturesque in great measure must depend.
无限是崇高的最有效的原因之一；无边无际的海洋因此而激发出可怕的感觉：要赋予海洋如画的感觉，就必须破坏其崇高的原因；因为风景如画在很大程度上必须依赖于其边界的形状和布局。

It seems to me that mere unmixed ugliness does not arise from sharp angles, or from any sudden variation, but rather from that want of form, that unshapen lumpish appearance, which, perhaps, no one word exactly expresses; a quality that never can be mistaken for beauty, never can adorn it, and which is equally unconnected with the sublime and the picturesque. In Latin, forma is sometimes used singly for beauty, and seems to signify that beauty is form in its most exquisitely finished state, when the last touches of the master’s hand have left nothing to add, nothing to diminishsuch as we find in the most perfect Grecian sculpture. But were an artist to model, in any soft material, a head from the Venus or the Apollo, and then by way of experiment to make the nose longer or sharper-rising more suddenly towards the middle,-or strongly aquiline; were he to give a striking projection to the eyebrow, -or to break the outline of the face into angles,-though he would destroy beauty, yet he might create character, and something grand or picturesque might be produced by such a trial. But let him take the contrary method, let him clog and fill up all those nicely marked variations, of whose happy union and connection beauty is the result, and ugliness, and that only, must be the consequence. Were he afterwards to place warts and carbuncles on the nose, or any other unnatural wens and excrescencies on the face; were he to twist the mouth, or make the nose awry, or of an enormous size, he would then add deformity to ugliness.
在我看来，纯粹的丑陋并非源于尖锐的角度，也并非源于任何突如其来的变化，而是源于形式的匮乏，源于没有任何一个词可以准确表达的不成形的块状外观；这种特质永远不会被误认为是美，永远无法装饰美，同样也与崇高和如画无关。在拉丁语中，forma 有时单独用来指美，似乎表示美是形式最精致完美的状态，当大师的手最后润色时，没有任何东西可以添加，也没有任何东西可以减少，就像我们在最完美的希腊雕塑中发现的那样。但是，如果一个艺术家用任何柔软的材料来塑造维纳斯或阿波罗的头像，然后通过试验使鼻子变得更长或更尖--向中间突然翘起--或变得更尖；如果他给眉毛一个醒目的突起--或将脸部轮廓分成多个角度--虽然他会破坏美感，但他可能会创造性格，通过这样的试验可能会产生一些宏伟或如画的东西。但是，让他采取相反的方法，让他堵塞和填满所有这些明显的变化，这些变化的快乐结合和联系的结果是美，而丑，那一定是结果。如果他再在鼻子上长出疣和痈，或在脸上长出任何其他不自然的疣和赘生物；如果他再扭曲嘴巴，或把鼻子弄歪，或把鼻子弄得很大，那么他就会在丑陋之外再添畸形。

Deformity is to ugliness what picturesqueness is to beauty; though distinct from it, and in many cases arising from opposite causes, it is often mistaken for it, often accompanies it, and greatly heightens its effect. Ugliness alone is merely disagreeable; when any striking deformity is added, it becomes hideous; when terror, sublime. All these are mixed in the
畸形之于丑，就像画质之于美一样；虽然畸形与丑截然不同，而且在许多情况下，畸形是由相反的原因引起的，但畸形常常被误认为是丑，常常伴随着丑，并极大地增强了丑的效果。丑陋本身只是令人讨厌的；如果再加上任何显著的畸形，就会变得狰狞；如果是恐怖，就会变得崇高。所有这些都混杂在

Monstrum horrendum, informe, ingens, cui lumen ademptum.