变化章第三
Chapter Three: Transformation of Individuality
古者，识之具也。化者，识其具而弗为也。具古以化，束见夫人也。尝憾其 泥古不化者，是识拘之也，识拘于似则不广，故君于惟借古以开今也。
Artists of oid left us a wealth of technical know-how to start with, but the one who knows the principle of transformation knows more than merely following them technically. And he is now rarely seen who strives to nourish on this tradition and develop his individuality by transforming the know-how into his own competence of painting. To my great regret, there are still some people who see know-how only but not know how to display their individuality in the process of artistic creation. Their inclination of taking a liking to the ancients thus hinders them from y broader scope of vision. A great master of an, however, is one who is able to turn ancient know-how into modem competence of his own.
又玲：“至人无法非无法也，无法而法，乃为至法。凡事有经必有权，有法必有化。—知其经，即变其权；一知其法，即功于化。
The great master, it is said, has no methodology. That, of course, is not true. The ultimate truth is not that one has no methodology to employ but that he is confined to no conventional method as such. The ultimate methodology is, after all, without method ready made for him.
夫画，天下变通[动]之大法也，山川形势之精英也，古今造物之陶冶也，阴 阳气度之流行也，借笔墨以写天地万物而陶泳乎我也。今人不明乎此，动则田： “某家皴点，可以立脚。非似某家山水，不能久传。某家清澹[淡],可以立品非似某家工巧，只足娱人。是我为某家役，非某家为我用也。纵逼似某家，亦食某家残羹耳。于我何有哉！
Whatever in this world that has a normal course must subject to some variation or change, and whatever technical know-how acquired by human effort must subject to some kind of transformation. To know the normal course is to see its variation, and to employ the know-how is to transform them for adaptation.Therefore I say that visual art is an an of transformation and variation. The ranges of mountains and rivers, the lives of creatures and creations, and the fluids of Yin and Yang in ali things, are all symbolized in a landscape painting by means of ink^effect and brushwork handled by a great mind at work.Todays artists do not quite understand this and so they often claim: "So and so has a great skill of texturing or dotting to be foUowed as a basic method, without which my painting of landscape would be worthless.1' Or they say ^So and so has a marvelous style of simplicity to be copied as a model, without which my painting would worth not even a laugh. But, to me^ what is most important is to define whatever is mine rather than to be confined anyhow. Even if my painting bears all similarities with others, it is not mine. What's there the use for me!
或有谓余曰：“某家博我也，某家约我也。我将于何门户？于何阶级？于何比拟？于何效验？于何点染？于何鞟纹？于何形势？能使我即古而古即我？ ”如是者 (则）知有古而不知有我者也。
Questions like the following are often heard:"What style makes my style simple? What style makes my style rich? And whose model should I follow? Which school should I pursue? What effect should I create? Whose skill of texturing or outlining or dotting or dying should T use? What kind of organizational principle should I adopt in my painting? What should I do to make my works like that of the great master's of old and also have some personal flavor of my own? What should I do after all?" To ask such questions, it seems to me, is to know only the aki master with no knowledge of oneself as an artist.
我之为我，自有我在。古之须眉，不能生（在）我之面目；古之柿腑，不能(安）入我之腹肠。我自发我之肺腑，揭我之须眉。纵有时触着某家，是某家就我也，非我故为某家也。天然授之也。我于古何师而不化之有？
What makes me is what I am. How can I wear others，hair and beard on my skin? How can I have others' lungs and heart pumping in my body? A picture of mine should surely bear my hair and beard without, and pump my lungs and heart within—to become me all over! Even at times, I happen to touch upon other people's skiJls or styles, they become first and for most the skills and style of minet not others1 any longer. For I am a person to learn first from nature, from which I believe other artists may learn too, and when I then come to learn from the great masters of art and make whatever theirs mine, you see, what else do I have but for my own individuality?