从八十年代迄今十余年,中国美术界没有一种现象如“新文人画”那样反复被讨论,无论褒也好,贬也好,它无疑已经进入历史。谁写中国现当代绘画史、或者后人写二十世纪中国绘画史时,若无记载“新文人画”,该著作就不够完备。“新文人画”也是当代美术话题中,被褒被贬最为对立的一个。这不是指对“新文人画”总体上的评论,有代表性的总体评论,从它诞生起,就本人所见的似乎贬多于褒。但对“新文人画”个体画家的评论却都是褒奖有加,它们加起来足于抵挡总体评论的贬谪。这是十分有趣的批评现象,也值得载入画史。今天要对“新文人画”作出公见的定论为时尚早,同代人只能 For more than ten years from the 1980s to the present, no phenomenon in the Chinese art world has been repeatedly discussed, such as the “new literati painting.” It no doubt has entered history no matter whether it is praised or derogated. Who wrote the history of modern and contemporary Chinese painting, or the descendants of the twentieth century when the history of Chinese painting, without a record of “the new literati painting,” the book is not complete enough. The “New Literati Painting” is also one of the most controversial topics in contemporary art. This does not mean that there is a general comment on the “new literati painting” and a representative general comment. Since its birth, what I have seen seems to have belittled more than praise. However, the comments made by individual painters of the “new literati painting” are both praiseworthy and add up enough to resist the relegation of the overall comment. This is a very interesting criticism, it is also worth loading history. Today it is still too early to make a public opinion on the “new literati painting”, and it can only be achieved by contemporary generations