Papers by Shi-yee Liu 劉晞儀
Ars Orientalis 53 (digital edition), 2023
本文以傳説中的驅鬼神祗鍾馗為基礎，解讀華盛頓史密森學會弗利爾美術館收藏的龔開《中山出遊圖》為一件隱性的自傳性作品，結合繪畫與題跋，抒發他在易代之際不能為國除凶的感觸。作爲元初的宋遺民，龔開要驅除... more 本文以傳説中的驅鬼神祗鍾馗為基礎，解讀華盛頓史密森學會弗利爾美術館收藏的龔開《中山出遊圖》為一件隱性的自傳性作品，結合繪畫與題跋，抒發他在易代之際不能為國除凶的感觸。作爲元初的宋遺民，龔開要驅除的鬼魅是仗勢欺壓漢人的異族，并不限於主政的蒙古人。他在繪畫和題跋中自我指涉，賦予鍾馗嶄新的形象和生平，呼應自己在宋末元初的特殊經歷。畫中影射的兩件時事透露他對穆斯林和藏僧的反感：1276年冬穆斯林蒲壽庚在泉州給復興宋室大業致命的一擊，1285年藏傳佛教領袖楊璉真加在紹興發掘南宋帝后陵寢。畫中的鍾馗一反傳統神勇形象，神態戒慎收斂，反映龔開委屈認命於異族統治下嚴酷的新現實。
Ars Orientalis 53, 2023
Drawing on Zhong Kui's legendary identity as a demon queller, this study suggests that Gong Kai (... more Drawing on Zhong Kui's legendary identity as a demon queller, this study suggests that Gong Kai (1222-1307) created a veiled autobiographical work, Zhongshan Going on Excursion in the Freer Gallery of the Smithsonian's National Museum of Asian Art in Washington, DC, that combines painting and inscription to project his unfulfilled aspiration to clear the nation of destructive evils. The demons to be expelled in his life as a Song patriot living into the Mongol Yuan were the powerful and abusive ethnic others, not limited to the ruling Mongols. Conflating himself with Zhong Kui by constructing a new, self-referential biography and image of the demon queller, Gong Kai conveyed his xenophobia during the dynastic transition through two topical allusions, the Muslim merchant-official Pu Shougeng's fatal blow to the Song revivalist cause in Quanzhou in late 1276 and the Tibetan Buddhist leader Yang Lianzhenjia's desecration of Song imperial tombs in Shaoxing in 1285. In the painting, Gong Kai confesses his resignation to the brutal new realities under alien rule by portraying Zhong Kui in an uncharacteristically subdued demeanor.
故宮學術季刊 (National Palace Museum Research Quarterly), 2021
石濤（1642-1707）二十五歲赴宣城之前的早年經歷直接關係到他日後的心態和藝術成長，但諸家之說有明顯差距。鑒於石濤為明朝宗室，身歷家國之變，後成爲禪師旅庵本月（1676年卒）的法嗣，本文重新... more 石濤（1642-1707）二十五歲赴宣城之前的早年經歷直接關係到他日後的心態和藝術成長，但諸家之說有明顯差距。鑒於石濤為明朝宗室，身歷家國之變，後成爲禪師旅庵本月（1676年卒）的法嗣，本文重新檢視其畫作、題識和詩文，置於南明永曆朝（1647-1662）的興衰和禪宗法嗣擇選的政教背景，對他從廣西全州遷武昌（約1653年春）、再遷松江（約1663年春）的時間提出比較確切的新推測，同時探索其心路歷程，認爲石濤對明清易代的歷史現實從傷痛轉爲擁護，他的自我形象也隨之演變，才華和野心驅使他在禪修和藝術上勇於嘗新。石濤早年的存世作品極少，本文主要根據廣東省博物館所藏〈山水花卉冊〉（約繪於1655至1664年間），並參酌大都會藝術博物館所藏〈十六羅漢圖〉卷（繪於1667年）中出現的新手法，追溯他的書畫啟蒙：書法據文獻記載在全州時初學顔真卿；武昌時期另習鍾繇（151-230），並學畫竹石花卉和山水；松江期間因見識到丁雲鵬（1547-1628以後）和其仿效者留在當地的佛畫，人物畫數年間大進，又可能因接觸董其昌（1555-1636）的繪畫和理論，山水畫出現半抽象、平面化表現。
Shitao’s (1642-1707) complex life experiences before moving to Xuancheng, Anhui, at the age of 25 sui exerted a lasting impact on his mentality and art but has remained a subject of debate with regard to a few issues. In view of his double identity as a descendant of the expelled Ming imperial house and a dharma heir to the Chan master Lü’an Benyue, this article re-examines his art works, inscriptions, and poems in the context of the doomed Yongli regime of the Southern Ming and the grueling training of a dharma heir in the Linji sect of Chan Buddhism. Proposing a better substantiated chronology of Shitao’s move from Quanzhou, Guangxi Province, first to Wuchang (early 1653) and then to Songjiang (early 1663), It also traces his spiritual journey through the intersection of the historical and the individual. As the trauma over dynastic change eased into an eager embrace of the new regime, his religious and artistic identities evolved in tandem. Talent and ambition drove him in the quest for the new. Shitao’s extant early works are rare. By analyzing his Landscapes and Flowers album (ca. 1655-ca. 1664) in the Guangdong Provincial Museum and the new development as reflected in his Sixteen Luohans (dated 1667) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, this article provides a glimpse into his burgeoning art practice. In calligraphy, he began with the Yan Zhenqing style while in Quanzhou. During his sojourn in Wuchang, Zhong You became a major model and he started painting flowers and landscapes in earnest. In the Songjiang period, he progressed remarkably in figure painting thanks to exposure to the Buddhist paintings by Ding Yunpeng and his followers kept in the region. Shitao also started experimenting with semi-abstract imagery and flattened space in landscape painting probably inspired by Dong Qichang’s painting and theory.
Arts Asiatiques, 2020
By examining the historical context of the Sixteen Luohans, a scroll painted in Anhui in 1667 by ... more By examining the historical context of the Sixteen Luohans, a scroll painted in Anhui in 1667 by Shitao, a Buddhist monk and major painter of the 17th century, this article proposes a new chronology of Shitao’s early life and explores the autobiographical dimension of the work. Against the pictorial tradition of the Sixteen Luohans, Shitao expanded the dragon-subjugation section, placed it at the center and substituted a vase to a bowl as the tool for the task. This substitution was probably inspired by the legend of the monk Li Chenghui (876‒925), who retrieved a dragon into a vase. With the
symbolism of wayward dragon as impediments to enlightenment in Chinese Buddhism, Li’s story resonated with the tenet of restoring one’s stray mind to its original state of purity in Neo-Confucianism as well in later times. The resonance may explain the vase in the dragon-subjugation scenes in, for instance, Wu Bin’s and Ding Yunpeng’s Luohan paintings, to which Shitao’s work is indebted.
Keywords: Shitao; Luohan painting; Sixteen Luohans; Dragon-subjugation; Wu Bin; Ding Yunpeng; xin xue
故宫博物院院刊 (Palace Museum Journal), 2020
[引自《故宫博物院院刊》]
十六罗汉是中国人物画中最古老而流行的题材之一，历代画作的母题和构图有大致模式，其中的降龙罗汉惯例持钵。石涛的《十六罗汉图》卷却在中段用约略三分之一的幅面描绘一罗汉持瓶... more [引自《故宫博物院院刊》]
十六罗汉是中国人物画中最古老而流行的题材之一，历代画作的母题和构图有大致模式，其中的降龙罗汉惯例持钵。石涛的《十六罗汉图》卷却在中段用约略三分之一的幅面描绘一罗汉持瓶降龙，此段云水澎湃，龙颜惊愤，迥异他段的清和闲散。降龙归瓶的图像晚明时出现于吴彬和丁云鹏的画作，应与当时的心学思潮及诠释收心理论的通俗小说《西游记》有关。石涛作此图时因梦想重挫而引发了退身心境，故在画中沿用呼应禅修的降龙归瓶典故，并以此作为全画的核心，寄托自己从此潜心修道、不务名位的意向。此图是石涛以宗教画兼为自传言志之作。
Retrieving Dragon into Vase: The Core of Shitao’s ‘Sixteen Arhats’ Hand-
Scroll and The Symbol of His Retreat
Abstract: The motif of ‘Sixteen Arhats’ (Shiliu Luohan Tu) passes down among the oldest and most popular subjects in Chinese figure painting. The Traditional composition in the handscroll format progresses from one vignette to the next at a largely regular pace and the dragon-subjugating Arhat (Luohan) holds a bowl as his tool. In Shitao’s ‘Sixteen Arhats’ (Shiliu Luohan Tu), however, the middle section that takes up to about a third of the entire scroll depicts only a dragon being sucked into a vase in a Arhat’s (Luohan) hand. The turbulent water and air and the dragon’s vivid fright and rage distinguish this section from the delightful ease elsewhere in the painting. In the late Ming dynasty, imagery of retrieving the dragon into the vase figured prominently in the Arhat (Luohan) paintings of Wu Bin and Ding Yunpeng, which is probably related to the current thriving of Xīn Xué (the Learning of the Heart-and-mind) and, in particular, the mainstream interpretation of the popular fiction of Journey to The West (Xī Yóu Ji), as an allegory of retrieving the straying mind in spiritual cultivation. Shitao adopted this Chan-resonant theme in his painting out of the determination to turn inward after his worldly ambition had been derailed. With the scene of the dragon returning into the vase as its core, this religious painting also serves as Shitao’s manifesto of refreshed religious devotion in place of his earlier pursuit of fame and status.
Metropolitan Museum Journal , 2019
丹青宝筏：董其昌书画艺术国际研讨会论文稿，上海博物馆 (非正式出版), 2019
董其昌（1555-1636）的画学强调仿古，仿古求法所得的是不是活法，全在能不能变化、超越。倪瓒（1306-1374）是他钻研最深的画家之一，仿倪之作始于近似，终于不似，尽以己意出之，体现他的仿... more 董其昌（1555-1636）的画学强调仿古，仿古求法所得的是不是活法，全在能不能变化、超越。倪瓒（1306-1374）是他钻研最深的画家之一，仿倪之作始于近似，终于不似，尽以己意出之，体现他的仿古理想。董其昌早先仿倪瓒的披麻皴之作，约1610年代中期开始，改以倪瓒成熟典型的方折山石为主。最特殊的，是1620年代后期出现一类声称仿倪、却极不似倪的作品，他自谓上溯倪瓒所师法的关仝（约活动于907-923）。本文尝试勾勒董其昌仿倪瓒数十年的复杂历程，并探究其从似变为不似、风格几乎相反的缘由。
董其昌仿倪瓒一水两岸架构且风格近似的作品出现较早。1611年所作山水册页重现倪画疏旷宁寂的意境。绘于1610年代中期的山水轴似仿效倪瓒的《虞山林壑图》轴，构图、母题和皴法皆类。其后董其昌仿倪改以衍自关仝的折带皴和方平石为主，无纪年的《画稿册》中有数幅以此为主题，纪年作品亦有多幅反映倪瓒《容膝斋图》、《渔庄秋霁图》等用干笔淡墨、横皴墨苔造成的光影烁动效果，但笔触趋于程式化、书法化，脱离写形，追求纯粹的笔墨趣味。
董其昌有不少作品声称仿倪瓒，却添加中景和母题，或融入显著的他家元素，例如黄公望（1269-1354）的浑厚和王蒙（1308-1385）的雄健，致使倪瓒本色不彰。1620年代后期，董其昌仿倪在三段式架构和平远丘山之外，另用斜角构图和岩壁峻岭表现动势和壮阔，迥异倪画。其中1634年绘制的山水轴尤其特殊，景物繁杂，石壁峥嵘陡峭，全幅物象斜行，从前景一波波向上推移，走势曲折遒劲，结构和母题近似他仿关仝所作《关山雪霁图》，而画面动势的开展可比关仝《秋山晚翠图》轴，是他自谓“以关家笔写元镇山”的杰作。
晚明时倪瓒画虽备受清赏，但王世贞（1526-1590）批评倪瓒“以雅弱取姿，宜登逸品，未是当家。”董其昌称倪瓒山石“妩媚”，林木“柔隽”，似乎所见略同。他赞倪画“寂寥小景自有烟霞之色”，但仿作时却常融入黄公望、王蒙风格，并不以“寂寥”为依归。“取势”为董其昌论画关键，跌宕劲健的关仝画是典范之一，然而倪瓒学关仝仅止于山石造型，不及其整体气势。董其昌以“寂寥取韵类杜权”概括倪瓒画风，即鉴于疏旷的一水两岸难以建立他所谓“三、四大分合所以成章”的动势。他晚年在仿倪作品中注入关仝的峰崖母题和斜向布局，添加深远、高远之景和倾侧物象，或在弥补倪画的动势不足。
Central to Dong Qichang’s (1555-1636) painting theory is the mastery of the art of past masters through imitation. Whether imitation eventually contributes to creativity depends on the painter’s ability to transcend his sources. Ni Zan (1306-1374) is one of the artists that he studied most assiduously. His painting in the style of Ni Zan, starting with sufficient resemblance and ending barely recognizable, embodies his ideal of creative imitation. After an early period of emulating Ni’s works executed with the hemp-fiber texture idiom, he turned to focus on Ni’s mature style that featured angular brushwork and imagery in the mid-1610s. Most unusual is a group of paintings from the late 1620s onwards that he claimed to be in Ni’s style but bore little resemblance, since he actually went beyond Ni to draw inspiration from Ni’s model, Guan Tong (active ca. 907-923). This paper aims to trace Dong Qichang’s evolving interpretation of Ni Zan’s style through decades and to explore the reasons of his increasingly radical departure from his model.
In quite a few paintings inscribed as after Ni Zan, Dong Qichang added motifs to the middle ground or integrated imagery of exuberance and vigor, which compromises the purity and tranquility of Ni’s signature style. In the final decade of his life, Dong Qichang employed diagonal composition and steep mountain forms to evoke momentum and grandeur that was absent in Ni’s work. The hanging scroll done in 1634 may be considered culmination of this experiment. It compares well with two paintings regarded as Guan Tong’s at the time and attests to Dong’s revelation that he “painted Ni Zan’s mountains in Guan Tong’s style.”
Despite Ni Zan’s high reputation in the late Ming, Wang Shizhen (1526-1590) criticized his work as “elegant but weak.” Dong Qichang, who described Ni’s rocks and trees as “charming” and “tender”, might not object. He admired Ni’s sparse intimate scene (xiaojing), but infused his interpretations of it with opposite characteristics. More importantly, Dong essentialized propelling structural momentum (shi) in painting, for which Guan Tong had been noted since the Northern Song dynasty (960-1127). Ni Zan, however, adopted Guan’s angular rock motif but ignored Guan’s compositional principle. In his late interpretations of Ni’s style, Dong Qichang introduced Guan Tong’s cliff imagery and diagonal structure to re-invent Ni Zan to fulfill his own ideal of painting.
故宫博物院院刊 Palace Museum Journal, 2019
清初诸帝致力平定回疆，乾隆承康熙余绪，于乾隆二十年至二十四年间征服當地的准噶尔汗国，并平定囘部，大幅拓展了帝国的疆域，可谓其影响最大的贡献之一。为使这功勋永垂后世，他命郎世宁与宫廷画家合作，绘制... more 清初诸帝致力平定回疆，乾隆承康熙余绪，于乾隆二十年至二十四年间征服當地的准噶尔汗国，并平定囘部，大幅拓展了帝国的疆域，可谓其影响最大的贡献之一。为使这功勋永垂后世，他命郎世宁与宫廷画家合作，绘制一系列16幅巨大绢画记录战役前后，装饰宫廷。又鉴于版画易于复制、大量传播的潜力，命郎世宁等人缩小绢画为版画样稿，送到巴黎法国皇室御坊制成西洋風格的铜版画两百套，于乾隆三十五年至四十二年递交。
乾隆如此大规模地兼用绘画和版画系列纪念战勋，在中国没有先例可循，但呼应法王路易十四在17世纪下半和18世纪初用巨幅壁毯和版画系列炫耀其二十余年的开疆拓土大业，《御制版画集成》的制作和传播尤其关键，其中数册清初来到中国。身兼外交官的法国传教士活跃于清初宫廷，传播西洋科学和艺术成就斐然，乾隆此举很可能受到路易十四成功运用艺术作政治宣传的启发。
关键词：乾隆，平定准噶尔回部得胜图，路易十四，御制版画集成，壁毯，战图，刘松龄，缪岚
The early Qing emperors were committed to annexing East Turkestan in China’s northwest to the Manchu empire. Following Kangxi’s initial success, Qianlong completed the mission by subduing the Zunghar Mongolian confederation and Turkic Muslim tribes in the region between 1755 and 1759. The immense expansion of the national territory has been considered one of his most consequential contributions. To commemorate this momentous victory, Qianlong commissioned a suite of sixteen monumental silk paintings from Giuseppe Castiglione (Lang Shining) in collaboration with Chinese court painters. In view of the potential of prints for mass production and easy circulation, he also ordered the missionary-artists at his court to reduce the paintings to graphic designs for a suite of sixteen copperplate engravings in the European style. The French imperial workshop in Paris was commissioned to produce two hundred sets of the suite, which it delivered between 1770 and 1777.
This joint painting and print projects to glorify a military feat and the grand scale of both were unprecedented in China, but appear in line with Louis XIV’s enterprise of documenting his serial conquests with tapestry suites and compilations of outsize prints to promote personal and national prestige. The colossal print series, Le Cabinet du Roi, was particularly effective, and part of it arrived in early Qing China. French missionaries at Qianlong’s court, who enjoyed high esteem for their knowledge of European science and arts, doubled as diplomats for the French king. Louis XIV’s exploitation of art for political propaganda may have prompted Qianlong’s extraordinary endeavor to commemorate the East Turkestan Campaign.
Keywords: Qianlong, East Turkestan campaign, Louis XIV, Cabinet du Roi, wool tapestry, war pictures, Liu Songling (Augustin de Hallerstein), Adam-Frans Van der Meulen
2018年四王暨清前期书画研讨会论文集，北京：故宫博物院（非正式出版）, 2018
雲林宗脈：新安畫派書畫學術研討會論文集，澳門：澳門藝術博物館, 2015
本文的主題是大都會博物館2012年購藏的鄭旼（1633-1683）《黃山八景》冊。鄭旼在1670和1673年曾兩入黃山，此冊作于1681年，是晚年成熟期的代表，構圖根據記憶之外，也襲用山志的插圖... more 本文的主題是大都會博物館2012年購藏的鄭旼（1633-1683）《黃山八景》冊。鄭旼在1670和1673年曾兩入黃山，此冊作于1681年，是晚年成熟期的代表，構圖根據記憶之外，也襲用山志的插圖。此冊在選景和順序安排上相當特殊，黃山勝景甚多，八景極有限，卻選了似乎從未被其他畫家注意的〈釣臺〉、〈軒轅碑〉和〈天門〉三景，從而反映自己的家世和異于一般畫家的嚴謹學術背景，而以〈天門〉為首開，以〈天都峰〉為末開，則透露鼎革之際的遺民心態。
釣臺是元代學者鄭玉（1298-1358）垂釣處。鄭玉是新安理學的代表人物，學術之外，他在元、明異代之際寧死不屈的氣節也廣爲稱頌。鄭玉是鄭旼的先祖。鄭旼此開自題寫道初次遊山，即刻意尋找鄭玉當年垂釣的地點。推究其因，乃以世系血統為榮。鄭旼不但深究理學，遠承鄭玉，改朝換代後堅守遺民氣節也一如先祖，屢屢不畏風險在詩文中直抒忠憤。
黃帝煉丹成仙的神話與黃山成爲名山聖地有密不可分的關係，但鄭旼的〈軒轅碑〉一開完全不顧宗教傳説，只從所謂的“軒轅碑”上風化而成的綫條有如天然古文字，聯想到黃帝時倉頡造字之說，再從古字論及託名黃帝的醫書--學術性極高的《内經素問》--和其他冷僻的古籍，展現他獨特的學者興趣和造詣，遠超過一般文人的範疇。
鄭旼在末頁自跋中指出黃山一如四嶽，是天子祭天地的場所，有作爲政治象徵的重要性。他標擧〈天門〉為首開，對開題詩“天門日上”作于1673年八月十九日試登天都峰之後不久，内容十分晦澀。檢視史實，應為影射康熙敕令三藩撤藩和吳三桂等人反彈的傳聞，以天都峰日出暗示復明有望。1681年七月鄭旼繪此冊時，三藩之亂已將近平定，他在末開〈天都峰〉對開吐露惋惜追悼之意。
行到水穷处：班宗华画史论集，北京：三联书店, 2018
行到水穷处：班宗华画史论集，北京：三联书店, 2018
2017年《千里江山图》暨青绿山水画国际学术研讨会论文集（北京：故宫博物院） , 2017
青绿山水从展子虔的春景和二李的仙山楼阁，到南宋李结自抒心态的《西塞渔社图》卷，反映此画科从诉诸感官的装饰趣味迈入兼具知性内省的新境界。《西塞渔社图》虽有古拙元素，但在空间、比例、皴染等方面不出宋... more 青绿山水从展子虔的春景和二李的仙山楼阁，到南宋李结自抒心态的《西塞渔社图》卷，反映此画科从诉诸感官的装饰趣味迈入兼具知性内省的新境界。《西塞渔社图》虽有古拙元素，但在空间、比例、皴染等方面不出宋画讲求实境的大范畴。钱选《山居图》虽同样自写理想中的隐居处，但刻意反写实。由于入元后生活艰困，自知理想终归梦想，因此简化并极端化早期青绿山水平面装饰趣味的本质，使成幻境。大都会博物馆的钱选《陶渊明归去来图》和《王羲之观鹅图》也用亮丽晶体式的青绿山水制造幻境，传达的是自己和当时文士对两位古人的看法，透过反写实的山水坡石和其他变形物体，暗示传颂的赏心乐事只是表象。元初士人的遗民心态使他们推崇陶、王二人忧国忧时的一面。
李公麟为陶渊明归庄建立的典范在元初仍盛，何澄即一例。画家按照〈归去来辞〉文本，用墨笔描绘陶渊明归舟渐近，岸上家人童仆多人迎接的温馨场面。钱选画中岸上仅三位仆婢，无一留意渊明归来。冷清之外，与文本相悖的其他细节也逆转李公麟传统的超脱喜悦氛围，乃一青绿幻境。自从黄庭坚提出陶渊明自号“元亮”是因为钦慕诸葛亮之为汉相，南宋、元初多人附和，其中吴澄尤其重要，因为很可能与钱选有直接交往。钱选之画反映渊明辞官固欣于解脱，但失志的沉郁寥落是更真实的心境。
《王羲之观鹅图》出自李公麟传统的《兰亭图》，与南宋《凤墅帖》刻图和元末明初的仿本相较，钱选的改动寓意深远。两只小巧白鹅几乎看不见，王羲之眺望的是远方的烟云村树，极类北宋宗室赵令穰的湖乡小景，乃北宋京畿一带的景致。1286年三月周密在杭州主持缅怀兰亭的雅集，解读兰亭诸诗的悲情来自东晋士大夫欲为西晋故都之民而不可得，用以比照元初士人之怀宋。钱选此卷即表现王羲之遥念前朝故都之情。史籍记载王羲之居官时尽心国事民事，在宋元易代之际或比爱鹅引起更多共鸣。
宋亡后钱选自焚儒学著作，应出于对宋儒重心性、轻时务而误国的失望，肯定事功的价值。此二画或反映陶、王超脱表象下欲成事不得的无奈。
Repentant Monk: Illusion and Disillusion in the Art of Chen Hongshou (UC Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive), 2017
2015年《石渠宝笈》国际学术研讨会 论文集·下册 页103-120 [略修正], 2015
九州學林 (Chinese Culture Quarterly), 2008
Uploads
Papers by Shi-yee Liu 劉晞儀
Shitao’s (1642-1707) complex life experiences before moving to Xuancheng, Anhui, at the age of 25 sui exerted a lasting impact on his mentality and art but has remained a subject of debate with regard to a few issues. In view of his double identity as a descendant of the expelled Ming imperial house and a dharma heir to the Chan master Lü’an Benyue, this article re-examines his art works, inscriptions, and poems in the context of the doomed Yongli regime of the Southern Ming and the grueling training of a dharma heir in the Linji sect of Chan Buddhism. Proposing a better substantiated chronology of Shitao’s move from Quanzhou, Guangxi Province, first to Wuchang (early 1653) and then to Songjiang (early 1663), It also traces his spiritual journey through the intersection of the historical and the individual. As the trauma over dynastic change eased into an eager embrace of the new regime, his religious and artistic identities evolved in tandem. Talent and ambition drove him in the quest for the new. Shitao’s extant early works are rare. By analyzing his Landscapes and Flowers album (ca. 1655-ca. 1664) in the Guangdong Provincial Museum and the new development as reflected in his Sixteen Luohans (dated 1667) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, this article provides a glimpse into his burgeoning art practice. In calligraphy, he began with the Yan Zhenqing style while in Quanzhou. During his sojourn in Wuchang, Zhong You became a major model and he started painting flowers and landscapes in earnest. In the Songjiang period, he progressed remarkably in figure painting thanks to exposure to the Buddhist paintings by Ding Yunpeng and his followers kept in the region. Shitao also started experimenting with semi-abstract imagery and flattened space in landscape painting probably inspired by Dong Qichang’s painting and theory.
symbolism of wayward dragon as impediments to enlightenment in Chinese Buddhism, Li’s story resonated with the tenet of restoring one’s stray mind to its original state of purity in Neo-Confucianism as well in later times. The resonance may explain the vase in the dragon-subjugation scenes in, for instance, Wu Bin’s and Ding Yunpeng’s Luohan paintings, to which Shitao’s work is indebted.
Keywords: Shitao; Luohan painting; Sixteen Luohans; Dragon-subjugation; Wu Bin; Ding Yunpeng; xin xue
十六罗汉是中国人物画中最古老而流行的题材之一，历代画作的母题和构图有大致模式，其中的降龙罗汉惯例持钵。石涛的《十六罗汉图》卷却在中段用约略三分之一的幅面描绘一罗汉持瓶降龙，此段云水澎湃，龙颜惊愤，迥异他段的清和闲散。降龙归瓶的图像晚明时出现于吴彬和丁云鹏的画作，应与当时的心学思潮及诠释收心理论的通俗小说《西游记》有关。石涛作此图时因梦想重挫而引发了退身心境，故在画中沿用呼应禅修的降龙归瓶典故，并以此作为全画的核心，寄托自己从此潜心修道、不务名位的意向。此图是石涛以宗教画兼为自传言志之作。
Retrieving Dragon into Vase: The Core of Shitao’s ‘Sixteen Arhats’ Hand-
Scroll and The Symbol of His Retreat
Abstract: The motif of ‘Sixteen Arhats’ (Shiliu Luohan Tu) passes down among the oldest and most popular subjects in Chinese figure painting. The Traditional composition in the handscroll format progresses from one vignette to the next at a largely regular pace and the dragon-subjugating Arhat (Luohan) holds a bowl as his tool. In Shitao’s ‘Sixteen Arhats’ (Shiliu Luohan Tu), however, the middle section that takes up to about a third of the entire scroll depicts only a dragon being sucked into a vase in a Arhat’s (Luohan) hand. The turbulent water and air and the dragon’s vivid fright and rage distinguish this section from the delightful ease elsewhere in the painting. In the late Ming dynasty, imagery of retrieving the dragon into the vase figured prominently in the Arhat (Luohan) paintings of Wu Bin and Ding Yunpeng, which is probably related to the current thriving of Xīn Xué (the Learning of the Heart-and-mind) and, in particular, the mainstream interpretation of the popular fiction of Journey to The West (Xī Yóu Ji), as an allegory of retrieving the straying mind in spiritual cultivation. Shitao adopted this Chan-resonant theme in his painting out of the determination to turn inward after his worldly ambition had been derailed. With the scene of the dragon returning into the vase as its core, this religious painting also serves as Shitao’s manifesto of refreshed religious devotion in place of his earlier pursuit of fame and status.
董其昌仿倪瓒一水两岸架构且风格近似的作品出现较早。1611年所作山水册页重现倪画疏旷宁寂的意境。绘于1610年代中期的山水轴似仿效倪瓒的《虞山林壑图》轴，构图、母题和皴法皆类。其后董其昌仿倪改以衍自关仝的折带皴和方平石为主，无纪年的《画稿册》中有数幅以此为主题，纪年作品亦有多幅反映倪瓒《容膝斋图》、《渔庄秋霁图》等用干笔淡墨、横皴墨苔造成的光影烁动效果，但笔触趋于程式化、书法化，脱离写形，追求纯粹的笔墨趣味。
董其昌有不少作品声称仿倪瓒，却添加中景和母题，或融入显著的他家元素，例如黄公望（1269-1354）的浑厚和王蒙（1308-1385）的雄健，致使倪瓒本色不彰。1620年代后期，董其昌仿倪在三段式架构和平远丘山之外，另用斜角构图和岩壁峻岭表现动势和壮阔，迥异倪画。其中1634年绘制的山水轴尤其特殊，景物繁杂，石壁峥嵘陡峭，全幅物象斜行，从前景一波波向上推移，走势曲折遒劲，结构和母题近似他仿关仝所作《关山雪霁图》，而画面动势的开展可比关仝《秋山晚翠图》轴，是他自谓“以关家笔写元镇山”的杰作。
晚明时倪瓒画虽备受清赏，但王世贞（1526-1590）批评倪瓒“以雅弱取姿，宜登逸品，未是当家。”董其昌称倪瓒山石“妩媚”，林木“柔隽”，似乎所见略同。他赞倪画“寂寥小景自有烟霞之色”，但仿作时却常融入黄公望、王蒙风格，并不以“寂寥”为依归。“取势”为董其昌论画关键，跌宕劲健的关仝画是典范之一，然而倪瓒学关仝仅止于山石造型，不及其整体气势。董其昌以“寂寥取韵类杜权”概括倪瓒画风，即鉴于疏旷的一水两岸难以建立他所谓“三、四大分合所以成章”的动势。他晚年在仿倪作品中注入关仝的峰崖母题和斜向布局，添加深远、高远之景和倾侧物象，或在弥补倪画的动势不足。
Central to Dong Qichang’s (1555-1636) painting theory is the mastery of the art of past masters through imitation. Whether imitation eventually contributes to creativity depends on the painter’s ability to transcend his sources. Ni Zan (1306-1374) is one of the artists that he studied most assiduously. His painting in the style of Ni Zan, starting with sufficient resemblance and ending barely recognizable, embodies his ideal of creative imitation. After an early period of emulating Ni’s works executed with the hemp-fiber texture idiom, he turned to focus on Ni’s mature style that featured angular brushwork and imagery in the mid-1610s. Most unusual is a group of paintings from the late 1620s onwards that he claimed to be in Ni’s style but bore little resemblance, since he actually went beyond Ni to draw inspiration from Ni’s model, Guan Tong (active ca. 907-923). This paper aims to trace Dong Qichang’s evolving interpretation of Ni Zan’s style through decades and to explore the reasons of his increasingly radical departure from his model.
In quite a few paintings inscribed as after Ni Zan, Dong Qichang added motifs to the middle ground or integrated imagery of exuberance and vigor, which compromises the purity and tranquility of Ni’s signature style. In the final decade of his life, Dong Qichang employed diagonal composition and steep mountain forms to evoke momentum and grandeur that was absent in Ni’s work. The hanging scroll done in 1634 may be considered culmination of this experiment. It compares well with two paintings regarded as Guan Tong’s at the time and attests to Dong’s revelation that he “painted Ni Zan’s mountains in Guan Tong’s style.”
Despite Ni Zan’s high reputation in the late Ming, Wang Shizhen (1526-1590) criticized his work as “elegant but weak.” Dong Qichang, who described Ni’s rocks and trees as “charming” and “tender”, might not object. He admired Ni’s sparse intimate scene (xiaojing), but infused his interpretations of it with opposite characteristics. More importantly, Dong essentialized propelling structural momentum (shi) in painting, for which Guan Tong had been noted since the Northern Song dynasty (960-1127). Ni Zan, however, adopted Guan’s angular rock motif but ignored Guan’s compositional principle. In his late interpretations of Ni’s style, Dong Qichang introduced Guan Tong’s cliff imagery and diagonal structure to re-invent Ni Zan to fulfill his own ideal of painting.
乾隆如此大规模地兼用绘画和版画系列纪念战勋，在中国没有先例可循，但呼应法王路易十四在17世纪下半和18世纪初用巨幅壁毯和版画系列炫耀其二十余年的开疆拓土大业，《御制版画集成》的制作和传播尤其关键，其中数册清初来到中国。身兼外交官的法国传教士活跃于清初宫廷，传播西洋科学和艺术成就斐然，乾隆此举很可能受到路易十四成功运用艺术作政治宣传的启发。
关键词：乾隆，平定准噶尔回部得胜图，路易十四，御制版画集成，壁毯，战图，刘松龄，缪岚
The early Qing emperors were committed to annexing East Turkestan in China’s northwest to the Manchu empire. Following Kangxi’s initial success, Qianlong completed the mission by subduing the Zunghar Mongolian confederation and Turkic Muslim tribes in the region between 1755 and 1759. The immense expansion of the national territory has been considered one of his most consequential contributions. To commemorate this momentous victory, Qianlong commissioned a suite of sixteen monumental silk paintings from Giuseppe Castiglione (Lang Shining) in collaboration with Chinese court painters. In view of the potential of prints for mass production and easy circulation, he also ordered the missionary-artists at his court to reduce the paintings to graphic designs for a suite of sixteen copperplate engravings in the European style. The French imperial workshop in Paris was commissioned to produce two hundred sets of the suite, which it delivered between 1770 and 1777.
This joint painting and print projects to glorify a military feat and the grand scale of both were unprecedented in China, but appear in line with Louis XIV’s enterprise of documenting his serial conquests with tapestry suites and compilations of outsize prints to promote personal and national prestige. The colossal print series, Le Cabinet du Roi, was particularly effective, and part of it arrived in early Qing China. French missionaries at Qianlong’s court, who enjoyed high esteem for their knowledge of European science and arts, doubled as diplomats for the French king. Louis XIV’s exploitation of art for political propaganda may have prompted Qianlong’s extraordinary endeavor to commemorate the East Turkestan Campaign.
Keywords: Qianlong, East Turkestan campaign, Louis XIV, Cabinet du Roi, wool tapestry, war pictures, Liu Songling (Augustin de Hallerstein), Adam-Frans Van der Meulen
釣臺是元代學者鄭玉（1298-1358）垂釣處。鄭玉是新安理學的代表人物，學術之外，他在元、明異代之際寧死不屈的氣節也廣爲稱頌。鄭玉是鄭旼的先祖。鄭旼此開自題寫道初次遊山，即刻意尋找鄭玉當年垂釣的地點。推究其因，乃以世系血統為榮。鄭旼不但深究理學，遠承鄭玉，改朝換代後堅守遺民氣節也一如先祖，屢屢不畏風險在詩文中直抒忠憤。
黃帝煉丹成仙的神話與黃山成爲名山聖地有密不可分的關係，但鄭旼的〈軒轅碑〉一開完全不顧宗教傳説，只從所謂的“軒轅碑”上風化而成的綫條有如天然古文字，聯想到黃帝時倉頡造字之說，再從古字論及託名黃帝的醫書--學術性極高的《内經素問》--和其他冷僻的古籍，展現他獨特的學者興趣和造詣，遠超過一般文人的範疇。
鄭旼在末頁自跋中指出黃山一如四嶽，是天子祭天地的場所，有作爲政治象徵的重要性。他標擧〈天門〉為首開，對開題詩“天門日上”作于1673年八月十九日試登天都峰之後不久，内容十分晦澀。檢視史實，應為影射康熙敕令三藩撤藩和吳三桂等人反彈的傳聞，以天都峰日出暗示復明有望。1681年七月鄭旼繪此冊時，三藩之亂已將近平定，他在末開〈天都峰〉對開吐露惋惜追悼之意。
李公麟为陶渊明归庄建立的典范在元初仍盛，何澄即一例。画家按照〈归去来辞〉文本，用墨笔描绘陶渊明归舟渐近，岸上家人童仆多人迎接的温馨场面。钱选画中岸上仅三位仆婢，无一留意渊明归来。冷清之外，与文本相悖的其他细节也逆转李公麟传统的超脱喜悦氛围，乃一青绿幻境。自从黄庭坚提出陶渊明自号“元亮”是因为钦慕诸葛亮之为汉相，南宋、元初多人附和，其中吴澄尤其重要，因为很可能与钱选有直接交往。钱选之画反映渊明辞官固欣于解脱，但失志的沉郁寥落是更真实的心境。
《王羲之观鹅图》出自李公麟传统的《兰亭图》，与南宋《凤墅帖》刻图和元末明初的仿本相较，钱选的改动寓意深远。两只小巧白鹅几乎看不见，王羲之眺望的是远方的烟云村树，极类北宋宗室赵令穰的湖乡小景，乃北宋京畿一带的景致。1286年三月周密在杭州主持缅怀兰亭的雅集，解读兰亭诸诗的悲情来自东晋士大夫欲为西晋故都之民而不可得，用以比照元初士人之怀宋。钱选此卷即表现王羲之遥念前朝故都之情。史籍记载王羲之居官时尽心国事民事，在宋元易代之际或比爱鹅引起更多共鸣。
宋亡后钱选自焚儒学著作，应出于对宋儒重心性、轻时务而误国的失望，肯定事功的价值。此二画或反映陶、王超脱表象下欲成事不得的无奈。
Shitao’s (1642-1707) complex life experiences before moving to Xuancheng, Anhui, at the age of 25 sui exerted a lasting impact on his mentality and art but has remained a subject of debate with regard to a few issues. In view of his double identity as a descendant of the expelled Ming imperial house and a dharma heir to the Chan master Lü’an Benyue, this article re-examines his art works, inscriptions, and poems in the context of the doomed Yongli regime of the Southern Ming and the grueling training of a dharma heir in the Linji sect of Chan Buddhism. Proposing a better substantiated chronology of Shitao’s move from Quanzhou, Guangxi Province, first to Wuchang (early 1653) and then to Songjiang (early 1663), It also traces his spiritual journey through the intersection of the historical and the individual. As the trauma over dynastic change eased into an eager embrace of the new regime, his religious and artistic identities evolved in tandem. Talent and ambition drove him in the quest for the new. Shitao’s extant early works are rare. By analyzing his Landscapes and Flowers album (ca. 1655-ca. 1664) in the Guangdong Provincial Museum and the new development as reflected in his Sixteen Luohans (dated 1667) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, this article provides a glimpse into his burgeoning art practice. In calligraphy, he began with the Yan Zhenqing style while in Quanzhou. During his sojourn in Wuchang, Zhong You became a major model and he started painting flowers and landscapes in earnest. In the Songjiang period, he progressed remarkably in figure painting thanks to exposure to the Buddhist paintings by Ding Yunpeng and his followers kept in the region. Shitao also started experimenting with semi-abstract imagery and flattened space in landscape painting probably inspired by Dong Qichang’s painting and theory.
symbolism of wayward dragon as impediments to enlightenment in Chinese Buddhism, Li’s story resonated with the tenet of restoring one’s stray mind to its original state of purity in Neo-Confucianism as well in later times. The resonance may explain the vase in the dragon-subjugation scenes in, for instance, Wu Bin’s and Ding Yunpeng’s Luohan paintings, to which Shitao’s work is indebted.
Keywords: Shitao; Luohan painting; Sixteen Luohans; Dragon-subjugation; Wu Bin; Ding Yunpeng; xin xue
十六罗汉是中国人物画中最古老而流行的题材之一，历代画作的母题和构图有大致模式，其中的降龙罗汉惯例持钵。石涛的《十六罗汉图》卷却在中段用约略三分之一的幅面描绘一罗汉持瓶降龙，此段云水澎湃，龙颜惊愤，迥异他段的清和闲散。降龙归瓶的图像晚明时出现于吴彬和丁云鹏的画作，应与当时的心学思潮及诠释收心理论的通俗小说《西游记》有关。石涛作此图时因梦想重挫而引发了退身心境，故在画中沿用呼应禅修的降龙归瓶典故，并以此作为全画的核心，寄托自己从此潜心修道、不务名位的意向。此图是石涛以宗教画兼为自传言志之作。
Retrieving Dragon into Vase: The Core of Shitao’s ‘Sixteen Arhats’ Hand-
Scroll and The Symbol of His Retreat
Abstract: The motif of ‘Sixteen Arhats’ (Shiliu Luohan Tu) passes down among the oldest and most popular subjects in Chinese figure painting. The Traditional composition in the handscroll format progresses from one vignette to the next at a largely regular pace and the dragon-subjugating Arhat (Luohan) holds a bowl as his tool. In Shitao’s ‘Sixteen Arhats’ (Shiliu Luohan Tu), however, the middle section that takes up to about a third of the entire scroll depicts only a dragon being sucked into a vase in a Arhat’s (Luohan) hand. The turbulent water and air and the dragon’s vivid fright and rage distinguish this section from the delightful ease elsewhere in the painting. In the late Ming dynasty, imagery of retrieving the dragon into the vase figured prominently in the Arhat (Luohan) paintings of Wu Bin and Ding Yunpeng, which is probably related to the current thriving of Xīn Xué (the Learning of the Heart-and-mind) and, in particular, the mainstream interpretation of the popular fiction of Journey to The West (Xī Yóu Ji), as an allegory of retrieving the straying mind in spiritual cultivation. Shitao adopted this Chan-resonant theme in his painting out of the determination to turn inward after his worldly ambition had been derailed. With the scene of the dragon returning into the vase as its core, this religious painting also serves as Shitao’s manifesto of refreshed religious devotion in place of his earlier pursuit of fame and status.
董其昌仿倪瓒一水两岸架构且风格近似的作品出现较早。1611年所作山水册页重现倪画疏旷宁寂的意境。绘于1610年代中期的山水轴似仿效倪瓒的《虞山林壑图》轴，构图、母题和皴法皆类。其后董其昌仿倪改以衍自关仝的折带皴和方平石为主，无纪年的《画稿册》中有数幅以此为主题，纪年作品亦有多幅反映倪瓒《容膝斋图》、《渔庄秋霁图》等用干笔淡墨、横皴墨苔造成的光影烁动效果，但笔触趋于程式化、书法化，脱离写形，追求纯粹的笔墨趣味。
董其昌有不少作品声称仿倪瓒，却添加中景和母题，或融入显著的他家元素，例如黄公望（1269-1354）的浑厚和王蒙（1308-1385）的雄健，致使倪瓒本色不彰。1620年代后期，董其昌仿倪在三段式架构和平远丘山之外，另用斜角构图和岩壁峻岭表现动势和壮阔，迥异倪画。其中1634年绘制的山水轴尤其特殊，景物繁杂，石壁峥嵘陡峭，全幅物象斜行，从前景一波波向上推移，走势曲折遒劲，结构和母题近似他仿关仝所作《关山雪霁图》，而画面动势的开展可比关仝《秋山晚翠图》轴，是他自谓“以关家笔写元镇山”的杰作。
晚明时倪瓒画虽备受清赏，但王世贞（1526-1590）批评倪瓒“以雅弱取姿，宜登逸品，未是当家。”董其昌称倪瓒山石“妩媚”，林木“柔隽”，似乎所见略同。他赞倪画“寂寥小景自有烟霞之色”，但仿作时却常融入黄公望、王蒙风格，并不以“寂寥”为依归。“取势”为董其昌论画关键，跌宕劲健的关仝画是典范之一，然而倪瓒学关仝仅止于山石造型，不及其整体气势。董其昌以“寂寥取韵类杜权”概括倪瓒画风，即鉴于疏旷的一水两岸难以建立他所谓“三、四大分合所以成章”的动势。他晚年在仿倪作品中注入关仝的峰崖母题和斜向布局，添加深远、高远之景和倾侧物象，或在弥补倪画的动势不足。
Central to Dong Qichang’s (1555-1636) painting theory is the mastery of the art of past masters through imitation. Whether imitation eventually contributes to creativity depends on the painter’s ability to transcend his sources. Ni Zan (1306-1374) is one of the artists that he studied most assiduously. His painting in the style of Ni Zan, starting with sufficient resemblance and ending barely recognizable, embodies his ideal of creative imitation. After an early period of emulating Ni’s works executed with the hemp-fiber texture idiom, he turned to focus on Ni’s mature style that featured angular brushwork and imagery in the mid-1610s. Most unusual is a group of paintings from the late 1620s onwards that he claimed to be in Ni’s style but bore little resemblance, since he actually went beyond Ni to draw inspiration from Ni’s model, Guan Tong (active ca. 907-923). This paper aims to trace Dong Qichang’s evolving interpretation of Ni Zan’s style through decades and to explore the reasons of his increasingly radical departure from his model.
In quite a few paintings inscribed as after Ni Zan, Dong Qichang added motifs to the middle ground or integrated imagery of exuberance and vigor, which compromises the purity and tranquility of Ni’s signature style. In the final decade of his life, Dong Qichang employed diagonal composition and steep mountain forms to evoke momentum and grandeur that was absent in Ni’s work. The hanging scroll done in 1634 may be considered culmination of this experiment. It compares well with two paintings regarded as Guan Tong’s at the time and attests to Dong’s revelation that he “painted Ni Zan’s mountains in Guan Tong’s style.”
Despite Ni Zan’s high reputation in the late Ming, Wang Shizhen (1526-1590) criticized his work as “elegant but weak.” Dong Qichang, who described Ni’s rocks and trees as “charming” and “tender”, might not object. He admired Ni’s sparse intimate scene (xiaojing), but infused his interpretations of it with opposite characteristics. More importantly, Dong essentialized propelling structural momentum (shi) in painting, for which Guan Tong had been noted since the Northern Song dynasty (960-1127). Ni Zan, however, adopted Guan’s angular rock motif but ignored Guan’s compositional principle. In his late interpretations of Ni’s style, Dong Qichang introduced Guan Tong’s cliff imagery and diagonal structure to re-invent Ni Zan to fulfill his own ideal of painting.
乾隆如此大规模地兼用绘画和版画系列纪念战勋，在中国没有先例可循，但呼应法王路易十四在17世纪下半和18世纪初用巨幅壁毯和版画系列炫耀其二十余年的开疆拓土大业，《御制版画集成》的制作和传播尤其关键，其中数册清初来到中国。身兼外交官的法国传教士活跃于清初宫廷，传播西洋科学和艺术成就斐然，乾隆此举很可能受到路易十四成功运用艺术作政治宣传的启发。
关键词：乾隆，平定准噶尔回部得胜图，路易十四，御制版画集成，壁毯，战图，刘松龄，缪岚
The early Qing emperors were committed to annexing East Turkestan in China’s northwest to the Manchu empire. Following Kangxi’s initial success, Qianlong completed the mission by subduing the Zunghar Mongolian confederation and Turkic Muslim tribes in the region between 1755 and 1759. The immense expansion of the national territory has been considered one of his most consequential contributions. To commemorate this momentous victory, Qianlong commissioned a suite of sixteen monumental silk paintings from Giuseppe Castiglione (Lang Shining) in collaboration with Chinese court painters. In view of the potential of prints for mass production and easy circulation, he also ordered the missionary-artists at his court to reduce the paintings to graphic designs for a suite of sixteen copperplate engravings in the European style. The French imperial workshop in Paris was commissioned to produce two hundred sets of the suite, which it delivered between 1770 and 1777.
This joint painting and print projects to glorify a military feat and the grand scale of both were unprecedented in China, but appear in line with Louis XIV’s enterprise of documenting his serial conquests with tapestry suites and compilations of outsize prints to promote personal and national prestige. The colossal print series, Le Cabinet du Roi, was particularly effective, and part of it arrived in early Qing China. French missionaries at Qianlong’s court, who enjoyed high esteem for their knowledge of European science and arts, doubled as diplomats for the French king. Louis XIV’s exploitation of art for political propaganda may have prompted Qianlong’s extraordinary endeavor to commemorate the East Turkestan Campaign.
Keywords: Qianlong, East Turkestan campaign, Louis XIV, Cabinet du Roi, wool tapestry, war pictures, Liu Songling (Augustin de Hallerstein), Adam-Frans Van der Meulen
釣臺是元代學者鄭玉（1298-1358）垂釣處。鄭玉是新安理學的代表人物，學術之外，他在元、明異代之際寧死不屈的氣節也廣爲稱頌。鄭玉是鄭旼的先祖。鄭旼此開自題寫道初次遊山，即刻意尋找鄭玉當年垂釣的地點。推究其因，乃以世系血統為榮。鄭旼不但深究理學，遠承鄭玉，改朝換代後堅守遺民氣節也一如先祖，屢屢不畏風險在詩文中直抒忠憤。
黃帝煉丹成仙的神話與黃山成爲名山聖地有密不可分的關係，但鄭旼的〈軒轅碑〉一開完全不顧宗教傳説，只從所謂的“軒轅碑”上風化而成的綫條有如天然古文字，聯想到黃帝時倉頡造字之說，再從古字論及託名黃帝的醫書--學術性極高的《内經素問》--和其他冷僻的古籍，展現他獨特的學者興趣和造詣，遠超過一般文人的範疇。
鄭旼在末頁自跋中指出黃山一如四嶽，是天子祭天地的場所，有作爲政治象徵的重要性。他標擧〈天門〉為首開，對開題詩“天門日上”作于1673年八月十九日試登天都峰之後不久，内容十分晦澀。檢視史實，應為影射康熙敕令三藩撤藩和吳三桂等人反彈的傳聞，以天都峰日出暗示復明有望。1681年七月鄭旼繪此冊時，三藩之亂已將近平定，他在末開〈天都峰〉對開吐露惋惜追悼之意。
李公麟为陶渊明归庄建立的典范在元初仍盛，何澄即一例。画家按照〈归去来辞〉文本，用墨笔描绘陶渊明归舟渐近，岸上家人童仆多人迎接的温馨场面。钱选画中岸上仅三位仆婢，无一留意渊明归来。冷清之外，与文本相悖的其他细节也逆转李公麟传统的超脱喜悦氛围，乃一青绿幻境。自从黄庭坚提出陶渊明自号“元亮”是因为钦慕诸葛亮之为汉相，南宋、元初多人附和，其中吴澄尤其重要，因为很可能与钱选有直接交往。钱选之画反映渊明辞官固欣于解脱，但失志的沉郁寥落是更真实的心境。
《王羲之观鹅图》出自李公麟传统的《兰亭图》，与南宋《凤墅帖》刻图和元末明初的仿本相较，钱选的改动寓意深远。两只小巧白鹅几乎看不见，王羲之眺望的是远方的烟云村树，极类北宋宗室赵令穰的湖乡小景，乃北宋京畿一带的景致。1286年三月周密在杭州主持缅怀兰亭的雅集，解读兰亭诸诗的悲情来自东晋士大夫欲为西晋故都之民而不可得，用以比照元初士人之怀宋。钱选此卷即表现王羲之遥念前朝故都之情。史籍记载王羲之居官时尽心国事民事，在宋元易代之际或比爱鹅引起更多共鸣。
宋亡后钱选自焚儒学著作，应出于对宋儒重心性、轻时务而误国的失望，肯定事功的价值。此二画或反映陶、王超脱表象下欲成事不得的无奈。