CAJ | 학술논문

夏皮罗在《描绘个人物品的静物画》中，批评海德格尔所论述的梵高的《一双鞋》并非是农妇的鞋，而是梵高本人的鞋，他以此认为海德格尔的自欺欺人无法论证他在《艺术作品的本源》中的观点。这个艺术史的考证并不能否认海德格尔理论体系的合理性，即使是梵高本人的鞋，鞋子本身依然是一个器具性存在，我们可以通过画作领悟到鞋子作为“器具因素”的存在。作品的意义不是为我们再现某个人某双特殊的鞋，而是通过创作者将我们带入一种本质性存在的丰富性，在这种“制造”的过程中，澄明得以敞开，真理得以发生。同时，艺术作品中真理的发生需要创作者和保存者共同完成。
하피라재《묘회개인물품적정물화》중，비평해덕격이소논술적범고적《일쌍혜》병비시농부적혜，이시범고본인적혜，타이차인위해덕격이적자기기인무법론증타재《예술작품적본원》중적관점。저개예술사적고증병불능부인해덕격이이론체계적합이성，즉사시범고본인적혜，혜자본신의연시일개기구성존재，아문가이통과화작령오도혜자작위“기구인소”적존재。작품적의의불시위아문재현모개인모쌍특수적혜，이시통과창작자장아문대입일충본질성존재적봉부성，재저충“제조”적과정중，징명득이창개，진리득이발생。동시，예술작품중진리적발생수요창작자화보존자공동완성。
In his The Still Life as a Personal Object, Meyer Schapiro criticizes Heidegger′s comments on Van Gogh′s A Pair of Shoes.He points out that the shoes do not belong to a peasant woman, but to Van Gogh himself.He also holds that Hei-degger cannot support his argument in his The Origin of the Work of Art with a false example.However, Schapiro′s criticism cannot deny the rationality of Heidegger′s philosophical theory.Even though they are Van Gogh′s shoes, they are still the being of equipment.Through appreciating this painting we can still comprehend the“factor of equipment”.The significance of the painting is not to show a certain person′s shoes, but to reveal the abundance of an essential being in the work of art. In the process of creating a work of art, the self-concealing Being is revealed and truth occurs as unconcealment.At the same time, the occurrence of truth in art requires the combined efforts of both creator and preserver.