Marx’s Theory of Artistic Production and Its Contemporary Value

In the “Introduction to a Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy” (hereinafter referred to as the “Introduction”), Marx first employed the concept of “artistic production.” Subsequently, on the basis of this concept, he treated artistic production as a special type of human social production, systematically elaborating it through propositions such as art as a “mode of appropriating the world” and the “uneven relationship” between the development of the two types of production. He discussed specific questions including “what kind of production is artistic production,” “the relationship between artistic production and social production,” and “what are the laws of artistic production,” thereby forming his theory of artistic production. Tracing back to its origins, we find that theoretical explorations centered on “artistic production” had already begun in his youth, were formally established in the critique of political economy of the 1850s, and were further enriched and developed in later works. Through this formative trajectory, we see that the process by which Marx’s theory of artistic production moved from its inception to maturity is also a process of the continuous enrichment and perfection of historical materialism. In this sense, Marx’s theory of artistic production is closely related to the emergence and development of historical materialism, and it demonstrates, from one aspect, the richness of the theoretical content of historical materialism. It can be said that Marx’s theory of artistic production reveals the relationship between artistic production and social production, explains the laws of artistic production, and provides a broad perspective and important inspiration for us to address the new challenges facing the construction of a socialist culture with Chinese characteristics under the new circumstances, to prosper and develop cultural undertakings and cultural industries, to promote the flourishing of socialist culture, and to construct a path for the development of a socialist culture with Chinese characteristics.

马克思在《〈政治经济学批判〉导言》（以下简称《导言》）中首次使用“艺术生产”概念，之后基于这一概念，他将艺术生产作为阐释人类社会生产的一种特殊类型，以艺术“对世界的掌握方式”、两种生产发展的“不平衡关系”等命题对其进行系统阐释，围绕“艺术生产是一种什么样的生产”“艺术生产与社会生产的关系”“艺术生产的规律是什么”等具体问题展开论述，由此形成了艺术生产论。追本溯源可以发现，围绕“艺术生产”展开的理论探讨自他青年时期就已经开始，在19世纪50年代的政治经济学批判中正式形成，并在之后的论著中进一步地丰富和发展。透过其形成脉络我们看到，马克思艺术生产论从创立走向成熟的历程，也是历史唯物主义不断丰富和完善的过程，在这一意义上，马克思艺术生产论与历史唯物主义的产生与发展密切相关，它从一个层面展示了历史唯物主义理论内涵的丰富性。可以说，马克思艺术生产论揭示了艺术生产与社会生产的关系，阐释了艺术生产的规律，为我们应对新形势下中国特色社会主义文化建设面临的新挑战，繁荣发展文化事业和文化产业，推动社会主义文化繁荣兴盛，建构中国特色社会主义文化发展道路提供了广阔的视野和重要的启示。

I. Two Types of Social Production: Material Production and Spiritual Production

一、社会生产的两种类型：物质生产与精神生产

Art is a creative practical activity of humanity. In the context of historical materialism, art, as a high-level social consciousness—that is, a form of social consciousness—originates in the material life of society and reflects the development and evolution of social material life. Specifically, “art is a form of consciousness that reflects social life by shaping concrete and vivid images, including many specific forms such as music, dance, painting, sculpture, drama, poetry, literature, architecture and decorative arts, film, and television. The greatest characteristic distinguishing art from other forms of consciousness is that it relies on the beauty of images (static and dynamic images such as color, sound, form, and emotion) to express people’s understanding, feelings, wishes, and will regarding social life, to grasp and reproduce vivid social life according to aesthetic rules, and to influence social life through the power of aesthetic appeal.” [1]1 This is a standard formulation in Chinese Marxist textbooks, summarizing the principle of the relative independence of social consciousness. From this, it is evident that grasping the essence of art and clarifying its path of development are inseparable from understanding the material activities of human society; art is closely related to social production. In Marx’s theory of social production, the system of social production is divided into two types: material production and spiritual production. Artistic production is a special form of spiritual production. It is both constrained by the general laws of material production and possesses particularities that distinguish it from material production. The division of social production into these two types was completed along with the establishment of historical materialism.

艺术是人类的一种创造性的实践活动，而在历史唯物主义语境中，艺术作为高层次的社会意识，即社会意识形式的一种，起源于社会的物质生活，反映了社会物质生活的发展和演进。具体而言，“艺术是通过塑造具体生动的形象来反映社会生活的意识形式，包括音乐、舞蹈、绘画、雕塑、戏剧、诗歌、文学、建筑和装潢美术、电影、电视等许多具体形式。艺术不同于其他意识形式的最大特点，就是它依靠形象（色、声、形、情等等静态和动态的形象）的美来表现人们对社会生活的理解、情感、愿望和意志，按照审美的规则把握和再现生动的社会生活，并用美的感染力来影响社会生活”。由此可见，要想把握艺术本质，明确其发展的路径离不开对人类社会物质活动的认识，艺术与社会生产密切相关。在马克思的社会生产理论中，社会生产体系被区分为物质生产和精神生产两种类型，艺术生产是精神生产的一种特殊形式，既受一般性物质生产规律的制约，同时也具有区别于物质生产的特殊性，而对社会生产两种类型的划分是随着历史唯物主义的创立而完成的。

In the *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, Marx regarded labor—this free, conscious practical activity of humanity—as the essence of humanity and initially proposed the concept of spiritual production, stating that “religion, family, state, law, morality, science, art, etc., are only particular modes of production and fall under its general law.” [2]2 Karl Marx, *Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy (Rough Draft)*, “Introduction,” section 4. The translation follows the standard English edition. It can be seen that he had already linked art with production, treating art as a special form of “production.” The establishment of the theory of artistic production began in *The German Ideology* (hereinafter referred to as *The German Ideology*). In this text, Marx and Engels, in their confrontation with German idealism, completed their philosophical revolution, established historical materialism, and provided a scientific theory for understanding human history and social development. In essence, the core meaning of historical materialism lies in placing the motive force for explaining the production and development of human history on the mode of material production of society, using the “material-spiritual” dichotomy to divide human society into two spheres: social being and social consciousness, and revealing the dialectical unity of social being and social consciousness. Social being determines social consciousness; social consciousness is the reflection of social being. Social being is the material conditions of social life, the material aspect of social life, and the objective source of the content of social consciousness. Social consciousness, composed of individual consciousness and group consciousness, is the subjective reflection of the material life process of society and its conditions. The driving force of human historical evolution lies in social being; social development and progress are propelled by the contradictory movement of the mode of material production (i.e., the contradictory movement of “productive forces and relations of production” and “economic base and superstructure”). In essence, the two propositions that “productive forces determine relations of production” and “economic base determines superstructure” encompass the entire meaning of historical materialism. Correspondingly, Marx and Engels applied the “material-spiritual” dichotomy to the concept of labor and, on this basis, explained the phenomenon of the division of labor. They pointed out that “division of labor only becomes truly such from the moment when a division of material and mental labor appears.” [3]3 Ibid. On the basis of the distinction between material and mental labor, social production was divided into two types: material production and spiritual production. Material production reflects the relationship between humanity and nature, referring to humanity’s appropriation of nature and creation of material wealth. In addition to material production, “men are the producers of their conceptions, ideas, etc.” [4]4 Ibid.—that is, humanity also engages in spiritual production. “Artistic production” belongs to one form of spiritual production, and it is precisely on the premise of the division of social production into two types that Marx embarked on the path of establishing the theory of artistic production.

在《1844年经济学哲学手稿》中，马克思将劳动这种人的自由自觉的实践活动视为人的本质，初步提出了精神生产的概念，即“宗教、家庭、国家、法、道德、科学、艺术等等，都不过是生产的一些特殊的方式，并且受生产的普遍规律的支配”。可见，他已经将艺术与生产联系在一起，将艺术视为一种特殊的“生产”形式，而艺术生产论的创立是他在《德意志意识形态》（以下简称《形态》）中开始的。在这部文本中，马克思恩格斯在与德国观念论对决中，完成了自己的哲学革命，创立了历史唯物主义，为认识人类历史和社会发展提供了科学的理论。本质而言，历史唯物主义的核心要义在于，将解释人类历史生产和发展的动因置于社会的物质生产方式之上，运用“物质—精神”二分法将人类社会区分为社会存在和社会意识两个领域，揭示了社会存在和社会意识的辩证统一关系，社会存在决定社会意识，社会意识是社会存在的反映，社会存在是社会物质生活条件，是社会生活的物质方面，是社会意识内容的客观来源，社会意识由个体意识和群体意识所构成，是社会物质生活过程及其条件的主观反映。人类历史演进的动力在于社会存在，社会的发展进步是由物质资料生产方式的矛盾运动（即“生产力与生产关系”“经济基础与上层建筑”矛盾运动）所推动的，本质而言，“生产力决定生产关系”以及“经济基础决定上层建筑”这两个命题涵盖了历史唯物主义的全部意义。与此相对，马克思恩格斯将“物质—精神”二分法应用于劳动概念上，并以此为基础阐释了分工现象。他们指出，“分工只是从物质劳动和精神劳动分离的时候起才真正成为分工”，以物质劳动和精神劳动的区分为基础，社会生产被划分为两种类型：物质生产与精神生产。物质生产反映的是人与自然的关系，指的是人占有自然，创造物质财富，除物质生产，“人们是自己的观念、思想等等的生产者”，也就是人还进行着精神生产，而“艺术生产”属于精神生产之一，也正是以社会生产两种类型的区分为前提，马克思走上了艺术生产论创立之路。

So, what is the relationship between spiritual production and material production? Marx and Engels pointed out: “The production of ideas, of conceptions, of consciousness, is at first directly interwoven with the material activity and the material intercourse of men—the language of real life. Conceiving,

那么，精神生产与物质生产具有怎样的关系？马克思恩格斯指出：“表现在某一民族的政治、法律、道德、宗教、形而上学等的语言中的精神生产。”可以看出，精神生产具有两重性，一方面是以意识和观念为代表的精神性，另一方面是以语言为代表的物质性。语言作为精神生产的物质性结果可以具体体现为政治、法律、道德、宗教等范畴，其中也包括艺术。本质而言，他们在处理精神生产和物质生产时，始终坚持物质生产优先性，强调人们创造历史的前提在于能够生存，即掌握生活资料，因此第一个历史活动就是生产生活资料的活动。在考察这一活动后，他们发现人还有意识，以及意识表现在某一民族语言中的精神生产活动，同时，在现实中，作为具体活动，物质生产在某种程度上决定精神生产，“精神生产随着物质生产的改造而改造”，社会结构和人与自然关系是在物质生产形式中产生的，而它们决定了国家制度和人的精神方式，从而决定了人们的精神生产的性质。

It can be seen that in *The German Ideology*, Marx and Engels used the “material-spiritual” dichotomy to divide social production into two parts — material production and spiritual production — while at the same time revealing, from the dialectical relationship between the two types of production, the primacy of material production and the subordinate position of spiritual production. Spiritual production is the production of such ideological forms as religion, morality, philosophy, and art in language, and it has a special character at different historical stages. This explains the different artistic forms that appear in different historical stages. In this sense, artistic production becomes an independent object of study, while at the same time the determining role played by material production over artistic production is an essential tenet of historical materialism.

可以看出，在《形态》中，马克思恩格斯运用“物质—精神”二分法将社会生产一分为二——物质生产和精神生产，同时从两种生产的辩证关系中揭示了物质生产的首要性以及精神生产的从属地位，精神生产是语言中的宗教、道德、哲学、艺术等意识形式的生产，在不同的历史阶段有其特殊性质，这里就解释了不同历史阶段中出现的不同艺术形式。在这一意义上，艺术生产成为一个独立的研究对象，同时物质生产对艺术生产发挥的决定性作用是历史唯物主义的要义。

II. The Law of Artistic Development: The Uneven Relationship between the Development of Material Production and Artistic Production

二、艺术发展的规律：物质生产的发展与艺术生产的不平衡关系

Although social being determines social consciousness, there also exists in human history the following phenomenon: in countries or regions with a relatively high level of socio-economic development, the level of development of social consciousness is not necessarily very high; conversely, in countries or regions with a relatively backward economic level, certain aspects of their social consciousness can nevertheless lead those of economically developed countries or regions. Based on this historical fact, the principle of historical materialism points out: “While reflecting social being, social consciousness also possesses its own能动性 [initiative] and unique laws of development; its development does not always remain consistent and balanced with the development of social being.” [1]1 This is a standard formulation in Chinese Marxist textbooks, summarizing the principle of the relative independence of social consciousness. That is to say, social consciousness both depends on social being and possesses its own relative independence; the incomplete synchronicity and imbalance between the development of social consciousness and social being is a prominent manifestation of “the relative independence of social consciousness.” This principle was put forward by Marx in the *Introduction* of 1857. On the basis of this principle, Marx derived the uneven relationship between the development of material production and artistic production, revealing the general laws of artistic development.

虽然社会存在决定社会意识，但在人类历史上也存在这样的现象：社会经济发展水平较高的国家或地区的社会意识的发展水平未必很高，相反，经济水平相对落后的国家或地区，其社会意识的某些方面却可以领先经济发达的国家或地区。基于这样的历史事实，历史唯物主义原理指出：“社会意识在反映社会存在的同时还具有自身的能动性和独特的发展规律，它的发展同社会存在的发展并不总是保持一致和平衡。”也就是说，社会意识既依赖于社会存在，又有其相对独立性，社会意识与社会存在发展具有不完全同步性和不平衡性即为“社会意识的相对独立性”的突出表现。这一原理是1857年马克思在《导言》中提出的，在这一原理的基础上，马克思引申出物质生产的发展与艺术生产的不平衡关系，揭示了艺术发展的一般性规律。

In the *Introduction*, when discussing the general theory of production, Marx explained the dialectical relationship between material production and spiritual production, as well as artistic production. In his view, artistic production, as a special form of spiritual production, stands in opposition to material production, and the two have a profound dialectical relationship. In his exposition, while comparing the different artistic developments of the Greeks, Shakespeare, and modern people, Marx pointed out: “As regards art, it is well known that some of its peaks by no means correspond to the general development of society; nor do they therefore correspond to the development of the material substructure, the skeleton as it were of its organization.” [2]2 Karl Marx, *Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy (Rough Draft)*, “Introduction,” section 4. The translation follows the standard English edition. That is, the proposition of “the uneven relationship between the development of material production and artistic production,” used to explain the special laws of artistic production.

马克思在《导言》中讨论生产一般理论问题时，阐释了物质生产与精神生产、艺术生产的辩证关系。在他看来，作为精神生产的一种特殊形式的艺术生产是与物质生产相对立，两者存在深刻的辩证关系。在论述中，马克思在对比研究希腊人、莎士比亚与现代人艺术发展的不同时指出，“关于艺术，大家知道，它的一定的繁盛时期决不是同社会的一般发展成比例的，因而也决不是同仿佛是社会组织的骨骼的物质基础的一般发展成比例的”，即“物质生产的发展与艺术生产的不平衡关系”命题，以此来阐释艺术生产的特殊规律。

The core of the proposition “the uneven relationship between the development of material production and artistic production” lies in the fact that the level of material production in the age of Greece and Shakespeare cannot compare with that of the capitalist era, yet Greek epic poetry and sculpture and other art forms “still give us aesthetic enjoyment and are in certain respects regarded as a standard and unattainable model,” [3]3 Ibid. and Shakespeare’s plays hold a major position in the history of drama, yet the capitalist era cannot produce works of the same kind. On this, Marx pointed out: “As regards certain forms of art, e.g. the epic, it is even acknowledged that they can never be produced in the epoch-making, classical form as soon as art production as such begins; in other words, that in the domain of art itself, certain important forms of it are possible only at a low stage of artistic development.” [4]4 Ibid. That is to say, the development of material production and artistic production are not proportional; this is a special law of artistic development. So, why does this uneven relationship between the two forms of production arise?

“物质生产的发展与艺术生产的不平衡关系”命题的核心在于，希腊和莎士比亚时代的物质生产水平无法同资本主义时代相比，但希腊史诗和雕塑等艺术形式至今“仍然能够给我们以艺术享受，而且就某方面说还是一种规范和高不可及的范本”，莎士比亚的戏剧在戏剧史上具有重大地位，但资本主义时代却不能诞生同类作品。对此，马克思指出：“就某些艺术形式，例如史诗来说，甚至谁都承认：当艺术生产一旦作为艺术生产出现，它们就再不能以那种在世界史上划时代的、古典的形式创造出来；因此，在艺术本身的领域内，某些有重大意义的艺术形式只有在艺术发展的不发达阶段上才是可能的。”也就是说，物质生产的发展与艺术生产是不成比例的，这是艺术发展的特殊规律。那么，两种生产的不平衡关系缘何形成？

Take, for example, the Greek era compared with the capitalist era. With the development of productive forces, the Greek era saw the emergence of social division of labor represented by agriculture and industry, which gave rise to material production and spiritual production. It became a reality that material production, spiritual production, and consumption were undertaken by different people, which promoted the development of human individuality and talent. At the same time, the separation of the utility of objects from their forms of expression began to form a non-utilitarian aesthetic attitude toward the forms of expression of objects—that is, the human capacity to process objects through artistic forms. It can be said that the division of labor developed human aesthetic capacity, creating favorable conditions for the development of art. In contrast, in Greek society, the purpose of production was use-value, not value; social spirit took humans, not objects, as the subject. Thus, it can be seen that Greek society, with its low level of material production, contained favorable conditions for artistic development, manifested in the aesthetic talent and free individuality developed through early division of labor, and the social conditions that nurtured human spiritual freedom, which together gave rise to the high development of artistic production.

比如希腊时代与资本主义时代相比。随着生产力的发展希腊时代出现了以农业和工业为代表的社会分工，由此产生了物质生产和精神生产，物质生产和精神生产及消费由不同人来分担成为现实，这促进了人的个性和才能的发展，同时物的功利性和表现形式的分离，开始形成人对物的表现形式非功利性的审美态度，即人用艺术形式加工对象的能力。可以说，分工使人的审美能力得到发展，为艺术的发展创造了有利条件。与此相对，在希腊社会，生产的目的是使用价值，不是价值，社会精神将人而非物作为主体。由此可见，物质生产水平低下的希腊社会蕴含了艺术发展的有利条件，表现为早期分工发展的人的审美才能和自由个性，涵养人的精神自由的社会条件，在此基础上催生了艺术生产的高度发展。

The prerequisite for the formation of Greek art was Greek mythology. Mythology is a spiritual activity that arises when humans are dominated and controlled by natural forces; it is an expression of humans conquering and dominating natural forces through imagination and fantasy. Greek mythology is “the unconsciously artistic elaboration of nature (here meaning everything objective, including society) as it appears in the popular imagination,” [5]5 Ibid. Marx’s original phrase is “eine unbewußt künstlerische Verarbeitung der Natur (hier darunter alles Gegenständliche, also auch die Gesellschaft verstanden).” a product of human fantasy. Marx believed that “Greek mythology is not only the arsenal of Greek art but also its soil,” [6]6 Ibid. providing material for Greek art and reflecting the relationship between the Greeks and nature and society. As humans’ ability to dominate and control natural forces grew stronger, mythology lost its soil. Social development rejected the attitude of mythologizing nature: “Could such views of nature and of social relations as underlie Greek imagination and therefore Greek [art] be possible in the age of self-acting mules, railways, locomotives and electric telegraphs? Where does Vulcan appear in Roberts & Co.? Jupiter, when the lightning conductor is installed? Hermes, when the Crédit Mobilier is set up? All mythology subdues, dominates and shapes the forces of nature in the imagination and through the imagination; it therefore disappears when real domination over these forces is achieved. What becomes of Fama alongside Printing House Square?” [7]7 Ibid. The names Vulcan, Jupiter, Hermes, and Fama are Roman and Greek mythological figures; Roberts & Co. was a 19th-century engineering firm; Crédit Mobilier was a French investment bank; Printing House Square was the location of *The Times* newspaper in London. Therefore, mythology disappears in modern society characterized by developed industry; modern society can no longer create Greek mythology, and thus Greek art loses the soil that nurtured it. The emergence of the uneven relationship is the best proof of this.

希腊艺术形成的前提条件是希腊神话。神话是人受到自然力主宰和控制时产生的一种精神活动，是人借助想象和幻想对自然力征服和支配的一种表现。希腊神话是“一种不自觉的艺术方式加工过的自然和社会形式本身”，是人的幻想的产物。马克思认为，“希腊神话不只是希腊艺术的武库，而且是它的土壤”，它为希腊艺术提供了素材，反映了希腊人与自然和社会的关系。随着人支配和控制自然能力的强大，神话也就失去了土壤，社会的发展排斥了将自然神话的态度，“成为希腊人的幻想的基础、从而成为希腊[艺术]的基础的那种对自然的观点和对社会关系的观点，能够同走锭精纺机、铁道、机车和电报并存吗？在罗伯茨公司面前，武尔坎又在哪里？在避雷针面前，丘必特又在哪里？在动产信用公司面前，海尔梅斯又在哪里？任何神话都是用想象和借助想象以征服自然力，支配自然力，把自然力加以形象化；因而，随着这些自然力实际上被支配，神话也就消失了。在印刷所广场旁边，法玛还成什么？”所以，神话消失于以发达工业为特征的现代社会中，现代社会不可能再创造出希腊神话，从而希腊艺术失去了培育它的土壤，不平衡关系的出现正是对此最好的证明。

In the capitalist era, material production is highly developed, but it has not reached an artistic level surpassing Greek art. Investigating the reasons, we find that the rapid development of social production has made the division of labor increasingly fine. While the division of labor has raised social productive forces, it has also disintegrated human wholeness and suppressed human aesthetic talent and individual development. At the same time, the purpose of production has shifted from obtaining use-value to obtaining value, no longer centered on humans but on capital. Artistic production must submit to the laws of capital in order to have the possibility of development. Thus, the favorable conditions for artistic development have all but disappeared, presenting an uneven state in relation to highly developed material production.

在资本主义时代，物质生产高度发展，但没有达到超越希腊艺术的艺术水准，究其原因会发现，社会生产的飞速发展使分工日益精细，分工在带来社会生产力提高的同时也瓦解了人的完整性，压制了人的审美才能和个性发展。同时，生产目的由获取使用价值变为获取价值，不再以人为中心，而是以资本为中心，艺术生产必须服从资本的规律才能获得发展的可能，因此艺术发展的有利条件消失殆尽，与高度发达的物质生产呈现出不平衡的状态。

From the above discussion, it can be seen that, unlike the understanding in *The German Ideology* that material production determines spiritual production, in the *Introduction* Marx believed that the flourishing of art is not proportional to social development and the development of the material base; artistic production and material production do not develop in parallel. The two diverge, and artistic production has its own special laws and relative independence. Thus, compared with *The German Ideology*, where he emphasized the fundamental determining role of the economic base for the superstructure, in the *Introduction*, while affirming the primacy of the economic base and material production for social development, he also advocates the independent development of artistic production. This is undoubtedly a caution against the tendency to exaggerate the economic base and material production, which can easily lead to “economic determinism.”

通过上面的论述可以看出，与《形态》中物质生产决定精神生产的认识不同，在《导言》中，马克思认为，艺术繁盛与社会发展和物质基础的发展并不成比例，艺术生产与物质生产也不是平行发展关系，两者有所背离，艺术生产有自己的特殊规律，具有相对独立性。由此可见，相较于《形态》中他强调经济基础对于上层建筑的根本决定作用，在《导言》中，他在肯定经济基础、物质生产对于社会发展的首要性地位时，也主张艺术生产的独立发展，这无疑是他对夸大经济基础、物质生产容易导致“经济决定论”的一种警惕。

III. “Artistic Production” as a Sector of Spiritual Production

三、作为精神生产部门的“艺术生产”

As is well known, historical materialism views the development of human history as a process of successive evolution of different social formations. Artistic production is closely related to social formations; in different social formations, artistic production has different characteristics. Marx pointed out that the social division of labor that appears at different historical stages divides social production into different sectors, such as industry, agriculture, handicrafts, etc. That is, with the division of labor as the boundary, social production manifests as “particular production,” which “is always a certain social body, a social subject, which is active in a greater or sparser totality of branches of production.” [8]8 Ibid., from the section on “Production, Consumption, Distribution, Exchange (Circulation).” In capitalist society, artistic production takes on an industrial tendency and becomes one of the “sectors of production,” which Marx calls a “sector of spiritual production.” Artistic production as a sector of spiritual production has the following characteristics.

众所周知，历史唯物主义将人类历史的发展视为不同的社会形态依次演进过程。艺术生产与社会形态存在密切相关，在不同的社会形态中，艺术生产具有不同的特征。马克思指出，在不同历史阶段出现的社会分工将社会生产分割成不同的生产部门，如工业、农业、手工业等，也就是以分工为界限社会生产表现为“特殊生产”，它“始终是一定的社会体即社会的主体在或广或窄的由各生产部门组成的总体中活动着”。而在资本主义社会，艺术生产具有了产业化倾向，成为“生产部门”之一，马克思称其为“精神生产部门”。作为精神生产部门的艺术生产具有如下几个特征。

First, capitalist artistic production is production for profit, not for people’s spiritual needs and aesthetic enjoyment. Marx pointed out that, historically, capitalist production is “the necessary point through which wealth itself — i.e., the ruthless social productive forces — must be forcibly created at the expense of the majority, and only such ruthless social productive forces can constitute the material foundation of a free human society.” Under the capitalist system, “even the highest spiritual production is only acknowledged and becomes forgivable in the eyes of the bourgeois when it is depicted and falsely interpreted as a direct producer of material wealth.” That is to say, artistic production must submit to the process of capital accumulation in order to proceed. Yet while capitalist society creates material prosperity, it simultaneously produces immense spiritual emptiness. Artistic production deviates from the principle of aesthetic creation and becomes a tool for capitalists to extract profit. The free individuality of art workers is suppressed, and their artistic character is distorted. “Outside this sphere of social production and exchange, nothing any longer appears as something higher in itself, as something rational for itself.” Artistic production is reduced to a type of capitalist production.

首先，资本主义艺术生产是为利润而生产的，不是为了人的精神需要和审美享受。马克思指出，从历史上看，资本主义生产是“靠牺牲多数来强制地创造财富本身，即创造无情的社会劳动生产力的必经之点，只有这种无情的社会劳动生产力才能构成自由人类社会的物质基础”，而在资本主义制度下，“连最高的精神生产，也只是由于被描绘为、被错误地解释为物质财富的直接生产者，才得到承认，在资产者眼中才成为可以原谅的”，也就是说，艺术生产要服从资本积累过程才能进行下去。但资本主义社会在创造物质财富繁荣的同时，却造成了精神世界的极大空虚，艺术生产背离了审美创造原则，变成资本家谋取利润的工具。艺术工作者的自由个性遭到压制，艺术品格发生扭曲。“而在这个社会生产和交换的范围之外，再也没有什么东西表现为自在的更高的东西，表现为自为的合理的东西”，艺术生产沦为了资本主义生产的一种类型。

Second, the law of value of capitalist commodities governs artistic production. A work of art is essentially something that manifests the author’s individuality and forms an aesthetic empathy between the author and the appreciator. But in capitalist society, because “all relations are in practice subordinated to a single abstract money-grubbing relationship,” “all things — not only land, but even human labor, the human person, as well as conscience, love, and science — necessarily become things that can be sold.” The criterion for measuring the value of a work of art is no longer artistic sensibility, but the amount of profit it yields. The artwork becomes a commodity, an object of competition; exchange value determines the fate of the artwork.

其次，资本主义商品价值规律支配艺术生产。艺术作品本质是彰显作者个性，形成作者与鉴赏者审美共情力的事物。但在资本主义社会中，因为“一切关系实际上仅仅服从于一种抽象的金钱盘剥关系”，“所有的东西——不仅是土地，甚至人的劳动、人的自身，以及良心、爱情和科学，都必然成为可以出卖的东西”，衡量艺术品价值的标准不再是艺术感，而是获取利润的多少。艺术品变成了商品，成了竞争的对象，交换价值决定着艺术品的命运。

Third, the artist loses free individuality and is reduced to a producer of artworks. In capitalist society, the artist, who ought to possess a free spirit, becomes a laborer like a wage worker, and artistic activity becomes an activity of producing art commodities governed by the principles of capitalist production. Marx held that in capitalist production, “labor of the same content can be either productive or unproductive labor.” For example, “Milton, who wrote Paradise Lost, was an unproductive laborer. In contrast, the writer who works in a factory-like manner for a bookseller is a productive laborer… because his production is subordinated to capital and is carried out only for the purpose of valorizing capital.” In Marx’s view, whether labor constitutes an element of the valorization process of capital and whether it produces capital are the key criteria for distinguishing productive from unproductive labor. His understanding of productive and unproductive labor as two aspects of the social determination of labor is quite profound. On the basis of this distinction, Marx reveals the situation of the artist in capitalist society.

再次，艺术家丧失了自由个性，沦为艺术品生产者。在资本主义社会，本应怀有自由精神的艺术家变成了如雇佣工人的劳动者，艺术活动变成受资本主义生产原则支配的生产艺术商品的活动。马克思认为，在资本主义生产中，“同一内容的劳动可以是生产劳动，也可以是非生产劳动”。比如，“弥尔顿创作《失乐园》，他是非生产劳动者。相反，为书商提供工厂式劳动的作者，则是生产劳动者。……因为他的生产从属于资本，而且只是为了使资本增殖价值而进行的”。在马克思看来，劳动是否构成资本增殖过程的要素、是否生产资本是区分生产劳动还是非生产劳动的重要标准，他将生产劳动和非生产劳动作为劳动的社会规定性两方面的理解是比较深刻的，依据这种区分马克思揭示了资本社会中艺术家的境遇。

Finally, capitalist material production and artistic production are “hostile” to each other. In the capitalist production process aimed at valorization, “the character that the capitalist and the worker possess as the two poles of a production relation — as labor increasingly loses all artistic character” — artistic activity must conform to the logic of capital’s movement in order to survive. But artistic activity is, after all, an activity of human free consciousness; it has its own independence, and the nature of art resists the reified rule of capital. Moreover, “here, the capitalist mode of production occurs only within a very narrow scope, and, by the nature of things, can only occur in certain branches.” Thus, artistic production in capitalist society can still operate according to its own laws within a certain range, which fundamentally contradicts capital’s demand that artistic activity abandon its own aesthetic value and subordinate itself to capital. Therefore, capitalist material production and artistic production are, to a certain extent, antagonistic. This, to a certain degree, also proves the principle of the relative independence of social consciousness in historical materialism.

最后，资本主义物质生产与艺术生产“相敌对”。在以价值增殖为目的资本主义生产过程中，“资本家和工人作为一种生产关系的两极所具有的性质——随着劳动越来越丧失一切技艺的性质”，艺术活动必须符合资本运动逻辑才能存续下去。但艺术活动毕竟是人的自由意识的活动，有着自己的独立性，艺术本性反对资本的物化统治，而且“在这里，资本主义生产方式也只是在很小的范围内进行，而且按照事物的性质只能在某些部门内发生”，可见，资本主义社会中的艺术生产在一定范围内仍然能够按照自身的规律运转，这就与资本迫使艺术活动放弃自身的美学价值而从属自身的诉求发生根本对立。因此，资本主义物质生产与艺术生产在一定程度上是对立的，这在一定程度上也证明了历史唯物主义中社会意识相对独立性原理。

Historical materialism points out that social consciousness has an active reaction on social being. Every social consciousness arises to meet the needs of the development of a given material life of society; it possesses the function and value of satisfying these needs, and under certain conditions it can transform into a material force that acts upon social being, influencing the course of history and the progress of society. As Marx noted: “The weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism by weapons; material force must be overthrown by material force; but theory, once it grasps the masses, also becomes a material force.” Therefore, social consciousness also plays an important role in social development. Advanced social consciousness reflects the trend and demands of social development and actively promotes social development; backward social consciousness does not conform to the trend and demands of social development and passively hinders social development. Capitalist ideology played a positive role in the anti-feudal struggle and promoted historical development. But capitalist social production aims at exploiting workers and extracting surplus value. Capitalist ideology maintains capitalist social production and hinders the realization of human freedom and emancipation. This is profoundly manifested in artistic production. In capitalist society, artistic production is reduced to a department of spiritual production within the social division of labor. Artworks are highly commodified, and artistic activity is alienated. This leads to the overall decline of art in capitalist society; artistic freedom becomes an empty phrase, and art is subordinated to capital. These are the essential characteristics of capitalist artistic production.

历史唯物主义指出，社会意识对社会存在具有能动的反作用，任何社会意识都是适应一定社会物质生活发展的需要而产生，具有满足这些需要的功能和价值，在一定条件下会转化为物质力量并作用于社会存在，影响历史的发展和社会的进步。正如马克思所指出：“批判的武器当然不能代替武器的批判，物质力量只能用物质力量来摧毁；但是理论一经群众掌握，也会变成物质力量。”因此，社会意识对社会发展也起着重要作用，先进的社会意识反映着社会发展的趋势和要求，对社会发展起着积极的促进作用，落后的社会意识不符合社会发展的趋势和要求，对社会发展起着消极的阻碍作用。资本主义的意识形态在反封建的过程中发挥了积极作用，推动了社会历史发展，但资本主义社会生产是以剥削劳动者，获取剩余价值为目的，资本主义意识形态维护着资本主义社会生产，阻碍了人的自由和解放的实现，这深刻地表现在艺术生产中。在资本主义社会，艺术生产沦为了社会分工体系中的精神生产部门，艺术品高度商品化，艺术活动发生了异化，这导致了艺术在资本主义社会中总体上走向衰落，艺术自由成为空话，艺术依附于资本，这就是资本主义艺术生产的本质特征。

IV. The Contemporary Significance of Marx’s Theory of Artistic Production

四、马克思艺术生产论的当代意义

As socialism with Chinese characteristics enters the New Era, the principal contradiction in Chinese society has been transformed into the contradiction between the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life and unbalanced and inadequate development. The imbalance between material production and artistic production is a profound reflection of this principal social contradiction. Standing at the height of human history, Marx revealed the dialectical relationship between material production and artistic production, providing a reference for us to grasp the principal contradiction in Chinese society in the New Era, to prosper and develop the socialist cultural cause, and to construct a path for the development of socialist culture with Chinese characteristics.

中国特色社会主义进入新时代，我国社会主要矛盾已经转化为人民日益增长的美好生活需要和不平衡不充分的发展之间的矛盾。物质生产与艺术生产之间的不平衡正是这一社会主要矛盾的深刻反映。马克思站在人类历史的高度，揭示了物质生产与艺术生产的辩证关系，为我们把握新时代我国社会主要矛盾，繁荣发展社会主义文化事业，建构中国特色社会主义文化发展道路提供了参考。

First, socialist artistic production with Chinese characteristics in the New Era must correctly handle its relationship with material production. As a special form of spiritual production, artistic production is constrained by the level of material production; the development of art must be based on economic development. Historical materialism is the basic methodological principle of Marx’s theory of artistic production. Marx pointed out that in examining social change, one cannot take social consciousness as the basis, because this social consciousness “must be explained from the contradictions of material life, from the existing conflict between the social productive forces and the relations of production.” The decisive factor in historical development is the actual economic relations. This is the implication of historical materialism contained within the theory of artistic production. Therefore, the flourishing development of the socialist art cause stems from the great achievements of socialist construction and from the people’s practice. To develop the socialist art cause with Chinese characteristics in the New Era, we must continuously consolidate the material foundation of modernization, continuously strengthen the material conditions for the people’s happy life, correctly handle the relationship between material civilization and cultural-ethical progress from a dialectical perspective, adhere to the mutual coordination of material civilization and cultural-ethical progress, and promote the comprehensive enrichment of things and the all-round development of the people.

第一，新时代中国特色社会主义艺术生产要正确处理自身与物质生产的关系。艺术生产作为一种特殊的精神生产受到物质生产水平的制约，艺术的发展要以经济发展为基础。历史唯物主义是马克思艺术生产理论的基本方法论原则。马克思指出，考察社会变革，不能以社会意识为根据，因为这些社会意识“必须从物质生活的矛盾中，从社会生产力和生产关系之间的现存冲突中去解释”。历史发展的决定性因素是现实的经济关系，这是艺术生产论内涵中包含的历史唯物主义意蕴所在。因此，社会主义艺术事业繁荣发展源于社会主义建设伟大的成就，源于人民实践，发展新时代中国特色社会主义艺术事业要不断厚植现代化的物质基础，不断夯实人民幸福生活的物质条件，以辩证的观点正确处理物质文明和精神文明的关系，坚持物质文明和精神文明相互协调，促进物的全面丰富和人的全面发展。

Second, artistic production under socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era must uphold the value pursuit of unifying social value and market value. Under market economy conditions, artistic production has a dual character, namely the creative attribute of free spirit and the economic attribute of productive capital. This dual character persists under the conditions of the socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics, manifesting as the relationship between the social value and the market value of art. Xi Jinping points out, “Literature and art must not lose their direction in the tide of the market economy,” and “under the conditions of developing the socialist market economy, it is also necessary to handle the relationship between righteousness and profit, and to seriously and conscientiously consider the social effect of works.” [10]10 The phrase “righteousness and profit” (义利关系) is a classical Confucian ethical distinction, here applied to the tension between social responsibility and market gain in cultural production. Therefore, cultural products with Chinese characteristics must place social benefits first and achieve the unity of social benefits and economic benefits. “When the two benefits and the two values come into conflict, economic benefits must submit to social benefits, and market value must submit to social value. Literature and art must not become slaves of the market, nor be stained with the stench of money.” This is the revelation left to us by Marx’s theory of artistic production.

第二，新时代中国特色社会主义艺术生产要坚持社会价值和市场价值相统一的价值追求。市场经济条件下艺术生产具有双重属性，即自由精神的创造属性与生产资本的经济属性，这种双重属性在中国特色社会主义市场经济条件下依然存在，表现为艺术的社会价值和市场价值的关系问题。习近平指出，“文艺不能在市场经济大潮中迷失方向”，“在发展社会主义市场经济条件下，还要处理好义利关系，认真严肃地考虑作品的社会效果”。因此，中国特色社会主义文化产品要将社会效益放在首位，实现社会效益和经济效益的统一。“当两个效益、两种价值发生矛盾时，经济效益要服从社会效益，市场价值要服从社会价值。文艺不能当市场的奴隶，不要沾满了铜臭气。”这是马克思艺术生产论留给我们的启示。

Third, artistic production under socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era must adhere to the development theory of “art for the people.” The production of outstanding artistic works requires that art shake off the control of capital, return to its free essence, connect artistic activity with human beings, and follow the development path of art for the people. Marx points out that the high artistic achievements of Greek art in human history stem from the fact that the artistic works of this period always took human beings as the core, whereas capitalist society suppresses people’s aesthetic capacity and free individuality, lacks the social conditions for nurturing people’s spiritual freedom, art submits to capital, and the department of artistic production degenerates into a department of spiritual production. Therefore, high-level artistic works are undoubtedly linked to people’s spiritual belonging and aspirations. [11]11 The term “spiritual belonging” (归宿) refers to the idea that art should provide a sense of existential or spiritual homecoming for people, a concept drawn from Marx’s critique of alienation. This enlightens us that socialist literature and art are the literature and art of the people. Adhering to the people-centered creative orientation, taking root among the people for artistic creation, enriching the people’s cultural life and elevating the people’s spiritual realm with literary and artistic works that reflect the great achievements of socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era — these are the guiding principles of artistic creation that all art producers should always follow, and they are the fundamental purpose and aim of socialist artistic production.

第三，新时代中国特色社会主义艺术生产要坚持“艺术为人民”的发展理论。优秀艺术作品的产生要使艺术摆脱资本控制，回归自由本质，将艺术活动与人联系在一起，走艺术为人民的发展道路。马克思指出，希腊艺术能够在人类历史上取得很高的艺术成就源于这一时期的艺术作品始终以人为核心，而资本主义社会压制人的审美才能和自由个性，缺乏涵养人的精神自由的社会条件，艺术屈从于资本，艺术生产部门沦为精神生产部门，因此，高水准的艺术作品无疑是与人的归宿和诉求联系在一起的。这启示我们，社会主义文艺是人民的文艺，坚持以人民为中心的创作导向，扎根人民进行艺术创造，用反映新时代中国特色社会主义伟大成就的文艺作品丰富人民文化生活，提升人民精神境界，是一切艺术生产者始终应该遵循的艺术创造指导原则，是社会主义艺术生产的根本目的和宗旨所在。

Author’s bio: Han Xiao, Lecturer at the School of Marxism, Central Academy of Fine Arts.

作者简介：韩笑,中央美术学院马克思主义学院讲师。