這句介紹得非常好：

“我前幾個月還看到一篇很有意思的學術論文，立意是從物理學力學的角度剖析好的書法的結構，言之灼灼”


這就在告訴人們在欣賞和臨中要分析， 明白結構美在什麽地方，要把對它的理解抽象出來， 用在自己的結構中，不僅僅是機械性的臨。

為什麽0.618是個產生美感的比例？ symmetry會產生美感，打破symmetry也可能產生美感。

如果不能上升到分析的層麵，那麽可能你臨到一定的時候，完全照著古人給你的結構可能做得不錯，想有變動時會發現還是不好看，還是要過自己掌握這一關。也就是說扶著拐杖什麽時候鬆一鬆能平衡的問題。

 

所有跟帖： 

• 回複：這句介紹得非常好： -善和- ♀ (364 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 10:24:08

• agree. even saint has flaws st. is not god. there is no god. -古色古香@- ♀ (70 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 12:36:22

• 分析別人的作品，能上升到理論高度當然好，但對更多的愛好者來說，感性認識也是很有幫助的 -布衣之才- ♂ (68 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 12:12:08

• 回複：分析別人的作品，能上升到理論高度當然好，但對更多的愛好者來說，感性認識也是很有幫助的 -古色古香@- ♀ (76 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 12:38:55

• 完全同意， 引深一點哈。。。 -善和- ♀ (2003 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 13:42:16

• 回複：完全同意， 引深一點哈。。。 -古色古香@- ♀ (419 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 14:28:37

• true for Jazz, right? :)))) -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 14:45:05

• can i see the shadow of jazz dancing in your character wrting? : -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 15:23:10

• Jazz is a music genre，not dance ;) -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 15:53:49

• art has more than one form. you know the story of -古色古香@- ♀ (333 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:08:51

• not much the shadow of Jazz, perhaps more shadow of Waltz :)) -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:18:53

• unfortunately i didnt see it~~~~ -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:24:13

• that's alright :)) I don't expect anyone to see the shadow of ot -善和- ♀ (52 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:30:55

• well it is just a voice, right?:) -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:34:20

• I appreciate all different view points towards my writing. -善和- ♀ (410 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 17:11:22

• 回複：I appreciate all different view points towards my writing. -古色古香@- ♀ (325 bytes) () 10/17/2013 postreply 01:50:47

• 回複：這句介紹得非常好： -古色古香@- ♀ (51 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 12:32:35

• yes, learn it wisely and effectively :) -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 14:45:59

• 回複：yes, learn first :) -古色古香@- ♀ (1 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 15:27:42

• how? -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 15:56:14

• 回複：mimicing :) -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:09:54

• soak it but not wet it :) -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:11:12

• micking is a skill. it is to do with accuracy. if u cant, fine, -古色古香@- ♀ (104 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:39:05

• What is " micking" ? -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:42:14

• wrong typing. mimicking. -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:53:34

• there are many ways, yet need to be explored, even mimicking ;) -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:56:33

• please see my lateast comment ;) -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 17:02:31

• 您為什麽不先學古人的字，要說它是 “醜，矯，怪，故作姿態。” 呢？ -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:00:23

• not mainstrem. -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:10:40

• Was Vincent van Gogh the main stream? -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:15:09

• r u Van Gogh? How do u appreciate his work? ;) -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:18:37

• irrelevant to the point you made. -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:21:41

• it is revelant. if you do not know how to appreciate his work, t -古色古香@- ♀ (78 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:32:55

• the point is -善和- ♀ (87 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:40:11

• 回複：the point u dont have the ability to learn -古色古香@- ♀ (59 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:43:41

• “accuracy” in art？ are you talking about art or science? -善和- ♀ (6 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:51:36

• likeness is an early stage of requiement for beginner, :)))))) -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 17:01:15

• for portrait sketch, yes :) -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 17:12:55

• 中國書法協會不代表main stream 代表什麽？ -善和- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 16:47:11

• see my new post please. -古色古香@- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2013 postreply 18:07:11