第四届“中国当代艺术与世界”（CCAW）国际论坛
对“真迹”的重视，亘古贯穿于人类与艺术的互动之中：我们重视“原创”（originality）并崇尚“真正的”艺术作品（the “true” artwork），排斥赝品与伪作（fakes and forgeries）。在欣赏的过程中，人们会期望艺术家展现“真实的自我”（true selves），但当这种表现未达预期时，便会引发质疑乃至反感。
“伪”或“赝”（deception）是指有意将“非真实”之物伪装为“真实”（authentic）的行为。在一个高度重视真实性的文化体系中，欺瞒反而成为潜在的对偶，即每一种“真实性的形态”似乎都存在对应的“作伪形式”（deceptive counterpart）:正如荷兰画家韩·范·梅赫伦（Han van Meegeren）著名的伪造维米尔（Vermeer）作品的行为，或中国艺术家张大千对石涛笔意的模仿，艺术中的欺瞒往往借助“原创”（the original）所蕴含的“灵晕”（aura）与“声望”，从而获得吸引力与自身的价值。
与此同时，这个过程挪用了人们对“真迹”（the real deal）的欲求，这种制造“虚假”的过程亦可能是一种“破坏性”（subversive）的策略。实际上，这也揭示了上述真实性观念背后所浮现出的“思想观念基础”（ideological foundations）与“隐藏动机”（hidden motivations）。
本届“中国当代艺术与世界”国际论坛将围绕“真伪之间”，探讨当代艺术领域中关于“真与伪”（authenticity and deception）的理论与实践问题。欢迎您投递从哲学、美学、艺术史、艺术批评、以及艺术创作等角度，讨论真实性、欺瞒、伪作、虚假（falseness）及其他相关概念及它们复杂关系的相关研究文章。
同时，我们亦欢迎来自艺术、策展、学术及管理等相关领域的人士参与议题的讨论，分享您关于真伪的理解与思考。
01以下为本届论坛的分项议题，可供申请人参考：
1. 真实的多样性（Varieties of Authenticity）
“真实”（authenticity）这一概念既模糊又多义，既包含描述性的层面（descriptive function），又具有价值评判的维度（evaluative dimension）。哲学家、历史学家及其他理论家曾尝试梳理这一概念所隐含的复杂价值与内涵，来解释我们在绘画、音乐甚至饮食美学等领域中对于“真实”不同形态的关注。当前对此的相关讨论状况如何？现行的分类体系是否仍具有改进空间？当代艺术家如何在艺术实践中讨论或质疑这种“真实性”的样貌（modes of authenticity）？
2. 赝品与伪作（Fakes and Forgeries）
从文艺复兴时期的版画到NFT艺术（NFT art），区分“原创”或与“伪作”的问题始终是艺术语境中的核心议题之一；这一问题不仅涉及技术层面的思考，亦事关哲学与权力政治。我们又为何在意艺术作品的真实性？这种关切是否具有普遍性？艺术家与理论家如何利用“真实性”所带来的文化资源资本（cultural capital）来强化某种思想与立场？当代的中国艺术家又如何在其实践中回应真实性所带来的理论与现实问题？他们的态度与西方主流观念相比，又呈现出何种差异？
3. 伪饰与假象身份（Posers and Impostors）
我们往往将艺术视为艺术家内心世界真实的镜像，并给予那些在创作中“袒露灵魂”的艺术家积极的评价；然而，艺术家在自我呈现（self-presentation）中也会误导观众，这一点可体现在其作品中，也出现在他们对自身创作的阐述中。这种常存在于艺术家“人格”（personality）与其作品所“形象”（persona）之间的错位（dissonance）有时源自艺术家有意的欺瞒（deceit），但更多情况下则可能出于某种“善意的自我迷恋”——艺术家深信自己所塑造的神话并沉溺于自我表演。这种“人格与形象的不一致”引发了多重哲学与艺术史层面的探讨：这种错位何时会演变为道德问题（morally problematic）？它如何影响了艺术创作的价值？当代中国艺术家在多大程度上承袭或违背了浪漫主义（Romantic ideology）所倡导的“艺术即灵魂真情流露”的观念？
4. 人工智能与欺瞒（AI Deceptions）
人工智能（artificial intelligence）的迅速发展令人瞩目，它能够模仿特定的风格和视觉特征,迅速而轻易地生成与现有图像极为相似的作品，并同样适用于音乐与文学领域。这类AI生成的作品（AI-generated works）虽具吸引力，却与其所参考的历史语境与个体创作并无真实关联。此类“高度逼真”的伪作（compelling fakes）的激增，将如何影响我们的艺术史意识？这种发展是否值得担忧，抑或能为我们理解艺术家的艺术思想带来新的启发？当代中国艺术家又如何合理地在其创作中运用这些技术？
02报告格式
20分钟报告时间，10分钟问答（Q & A）时间
03投稿说明
本论坛面向中、青年学者、博士研究生、策展人和艺术实践职业者，欢迎来自任何相关领域的投稿。虽然论坛的主要研究对象是中国当代艺术，但论坛也欢迎涉及当代艺术广泛问题的投稿，只要它们与本征稿的主题明确相关。
04格式要求
论文提案，请以长摘要形式（英文，约500字），连同个人简历，于2026年1月20日前发送至以下邮箱：ccawpku@163.com
入选论文作者将于2月第一周内收到通知。
05资助
论文入选者将获得1500元（人民币）的资助（以支持其差旅和住宿费用）。
主办单位：北京大学艺术学院、芝加哥大学北京中心
学术主持：
柯伟业（Michael Cavayero）（北京大学）
钱同济（Tongji Philip Qian）（芝加哥大学）
芮玛窦（Matteo Ravasio）（北京大学）
A concern for authenticity often guides how we engage with art. We value originality and revere the “true” artwork, while rejecting fakes and forgeries. We want artists to show their true selves and become skeptical whenever they present themselves as something they are not.
Deception is the willful attempt to pass something off as authentic when it is not. In a domain that values authenticity, deception naturally finds a way to thrive: Each mode of authenticity has its deceptive counterpart. As Han van Meegeren’s infamous Vermeer forgeries or Zhang Daqian’s imitations of Shitao demonstrate, artistic deception often feeds off the aura and prestige of what is original. In doing so, deceptions acquire an interest and value they would otherwise lack. Deception can also be a way to subversively undermine the ideological foundations of our desire for authenticity, appropriating our interest in “the real deal” to reveal its hidden motivations.
The 4th edition of the International Forum “Chinese Contemporary Art and the World” tackles the problems of authenticity and deception in the field of contemporary art. We invite papers on the theoretical foundations and practical manifestations of authenticity, deception, forgery, falseness, and other related concepts. We also encourage artists from all backgrounds to present on how authenticity and deception have shaped their artistic production.
01Some more specific questions and sub-topics include, but are not limited to:
1. Varieties of authenticity.The concept of the authentic is elusive and ambiguous, often bearing both a descriptive function and an evaluative dimension. Philosophers, historians, and other theorists have attempted to untangle the complex network of the values that guide our concern for various kinds of authenticity in domains such as painting, music, or even food appreciation. What’s the state of such debates, and can improvements be made to existing categories? How have contemporary artists explored or questioned these modes of authenticity?
2. Fakes and forgeries.
From Renaissance prints to NFT art, the problem of distinguishing originals from fakes has been central to much discourse about the arts. The questions raised by fakes and forgeries are not merely technical, but also philosophical and political. What are the reasons to care about authentic works, and are they always present? How have artists and theorists leveraged the cultural capital associated with authenticity to support their statements and views? How have contemporary Chinese artists engaged with the practical and theoretical concerns raised by authenticity, and how do their attitudes compare to the prevalent Western ones?
3. AI deceptions.
Artificial intelligence allows us to quickly and effortlessly generate images that closely resemble existing ones, mimicking the look of pictures associated with a particular period, author, or style. The same is true in the domain of musical composition and literature, where AI technology has also been progressing at an impressive rate. These AI-generated works are compelling, but also lack any actual connection to the individuals and historical contexts they implicitly reference. What is the impact of such a proliferation of compelling fakes on our art-historical awareness? Is this development worrisome, or are there ways in which these works can positively affect our understanding of the artists, styles, and manifestations they are based on? How have contemporary Chinese artists used these technologies in their work?
4. Posers and impostors.We often value art as a faithful mirror of the artist’s inner life, and praise as authentic those artists who lay their soul bare in their creations. But artists are often misleading in their self-presentation, both through the works they produce, and through their statements about them. A dissonance can develop between an artist’s personality, and the persona conveyed by their work. Artists can be outright deceitful, but the split often develops in good faith: one can come to believe one’s own myth or become ensnared in one’s own performance. These incongruencies between an artist’s persona and their personal identity invite a range of philosophical and art-historical inquiries. When does such a mismatch become morally problematic? How does it impact the value of an artist’s production? How have contemporary Chinese artists endorsed or subverted the Romantic ideology of art as the truthful outpouring of the artist’s soul?
02Format
20 minutes presentation, 10 minutes Q&A.
03Submissions
The forum invites submissions from early career scholars, PhD candidates, and practitioners (artists, curators, collectors, administrators) from any relevant background.
While the Forum’s primary focus is on Chinese contemporary art, we welcome submissions that treat a wide range of questions insofar as they bear a clear relation to the topic of this Call for Papers.
04Format requirement
Paper proposals, in the form of a long abstract in English (approx. 500 words), along with a CV, may be sent until 20 January 2026 to the following address:
ccawpku@163.com
The authors of accepted papers will be notified by the end of January.
05Allowance
Scholars whose papers are selected for presentation will be offered an allowance of 1500 RMB.
Organizer:Peking University, School of Arts in collaboration with The University of Chicago Center in Beijing
2026 Forum Academic Commission:
Michael Cavayero (Peking University)Tongji Philip Qian (University of Chicago)Matteo Ravasio (Peking University)
