The Road of “Bie-modern” of Periodization of Chinese Design Modern History

Abstract

In the western theoretical system of “Modernity”, terms such as “pre-modern”, “early modern”, “modern early “, “modern”, “post-modern”, and “modern and contemporary” are very popular. In addition, although the interpretation system established by the academic circles for the research of “modernization” and “Modernity” provides a broad and solid thinking paradigm, it seems to be unable to match with China's national conditions. The theory of “Bie-modern” put forward by Professor Wang Jianjiang was an original concept in the field of aesthetic modernity. The three backgrounds of this theory are not only unique in the field of aesthetics. Today's Chinese society integrates “highly modern”, “pre-modern” and “post-modern”, which is applicable to such a background for any subject field. China's academic field is facing the problem of “Bie-modern”, rather than the problem of modernity and post modernity in the West academics. On the one hand, the theory of “Bie-modern” provides original thinking for China to construct modernity theory based on its own development logic; On the other hand, it also provides another “modern vision” for the whole modern world. The development of Chinese modern design history is also in such a diversified modernity. It is extremely unbalanced in region, different in system, diverse in development path and continuous in depth. The research on the periodization of Chinese modern design history has encountered the embarrassment of unclear distinction between “modern” and “contemporary”. In fact, the discipline of design history may follow the growth path of “bie-modern”. The development of design in modern history has encountered a very complex reality. Xiaoou Cao once argued that “Chinese modern design was born in modern China”, and academician Shiling Zheng also pointed out that “modern architecture in Shanghai itself includes modern architecture”. This kind of “awkward” expression in the field of design history shows that the “dislocation” and “discord” in Chinese modern design and Chinese modern design history showing the form of “bie-modern”. The introduction of “Bie-modern” theory into the study of Chinese modern design history is an appropriate return of local theory. It is the interpretation and application of a creative theory aimed at China's special “Bie-modern” social form and institutional culture in the staging of design history. By borrowing the “Bie-modern” theory, the paper firstly analyzed the reasons for this situation, and then summarizes three important reference principles for the periodization of Chinese modern design history through the historical review, research and discussion of the breaking limit of the periodization of Chinese modern architectural history: the staging difference between general history and special history The non antagonistic relationship between “China Centered Theory” and subject ontology, as well as modern architecture and modern architecture. Clearly put forward three basic assumptions about the stages of Chinese modern and modern design history. One is to take the Central Academy of Arts and crafts established in 1956 as the beginning of Chinese modern design. The other is to turn the design history before 1949 into modern design history, followed by Chinese modern design history. The third is to divide modern, modern and modern design history into three independent stages. The staging of Chinese modern design history can provide a reference framework for its research towards clearer, accurate and in-depth research.