1934年可謂是東亞女性畫史上一個值得特別紀念的年代。臺灣的女性畫家陳進在當年以《合奏》一作站上的日本中央帝展的舞台，打開了她作為專業畫人前景的初局。兩年之後，她再以《山地門社之女》入選了日本官展，並為東京目黑雅敘園主人這位當年最活躍之日本畫私人藏家所購藏，從實質上取得了藝術市場的資歷。在中國的上海，1934年則出現了集結眾多女性創作者的「中國女子書畫會」，積極地藉由社團之力來爭取女性的藝術專業地位。上海的中國女性畫人雖無有公信力的官展足以依賴，然其與專業女學之結合則有臺灣所無的優勢，而經由潤例公開、新式展覽舉辦等舉措也得到大眾媒體的配合支持，因此亦在形塑專業形象上取得有效的突破。時年十八歲的年輕女性畫家郁風之《郁風朝陽》可說是此種樂觀前景之投射。臺灣與中國當時之文化脈絡雖各有不同，然在女性藝術專業地位上卻同時展現了突破，雖未能具體扭轉當時女性解放之困頓局面，卻值得視為大興女學後的可觀進展。

這個後來因戰爭而夭折的專業路，為何得以在三〇年代出現短暫的榮景，但卻未能在戰後得到復興的機會？便值得思考。對於前者，東亞女性在藝術教育上的「現代」發展固然奠立了必要的基礎，而其之所以能解脫於社會對婦女運動之諸多疑懼、攻擊之外，理由恐在於如此「現代」轉化仍然受到傳統「才女」觀的庇護。這種傳統才女觀的庇護顯然無法因應戰爭及戰後的局勢衝擊。郁風轉向回應國族危機之情境雖與臺灣的陳進無涉，但是，陳進在戰後所面對的則是舊有（東京）藝術世界運作機制的崩解。人們在重建之際，女性藝術家除了重新回歸才女的舊傳統外，似乎也無其他的出路。

The year 1934 is especially memorable in the history of Asian female painters. Chen Chin, a female painter in Taiwan, made her debut at Japan’s Imperial Art Exhibition with the work “Ensemble,” launching her career as a professional painter. Two years later, she was shortlisted for Japan’s government-sponsored fine arts exhibition with “The Women of Sandimen Area.” The painting was bought and collected by the owner of Meguro Gajoen in Tokyo—then the most active private art collector of Japanese paintings, which officially earned Chen a place in the art market. Meanwhile, in Shanghai in 1934, a multitude of female artists gathered to found the Chinese Women’s Calligraphy and Painting Society, actively striving to establish women’s professional status in the realm of art through the influence of the society. The Chinese female painters in Shanghai, though without a credible official exhibition to rely on, were able to merge the learning of art into professional education for women and create an advantage lacking in Taiwan. Moreover, by disclosing lists of remuneration and organizing new-style exhibitions, this group of female painters gained the support of mass media and thereby achieved a major breakthrough in establishing an image of professionalism. The young female painter Yu Feng, then 18 years old, was the very personification of this optimism and positive outlook. Given their distinct cultural contexts at the time, both Taiwan and China experienced a breakthrough in advancing women’s professional status in art. Although neither succeeded in breaking the deadlock in women’s pursuit of liberation, this advance can be regarded as a significant progress since the large-scale development of female education.

The reasons for the temporary rise of women’s artistic professionalism in the 1930s, and later, the lack of opportunities for this wave of professionalism to revive after the war, deserve further investigation. Art education for women in East Asia had gained the essential foundation for “modern” development in the 1930s. However, its freedom from the society’s manifold doubts and attacks against women’s movements was likely to have derived from the fact that this “modern” transformation of female education was still subsumed under and thus protected by the tradition of “talented women.” Apparently, the protection offered by this tradition ceased to exist because of the devastating impacts during and after the war. Yu Feng turned her attention to addressing national crises—a situation unrelated to Chen Chin’s experience in Taiwan. What Chen Chin faced after the war was the collapse of the existing mechanism and world of art (i.e., Tokyo in this case). While people strove for postwar reestablishment, female artists seemed to have no other ways out but to return again to the old tradition of talented women.

女性畫家; 陳進; 女子書畫會; 陸小曼; 郁風

Female painters; Chen Chin; Women’s Calligraphy and Painting Society; Lu Xiaoman; Yu Feng