任何一个来中国参观的人，最令其感到困惑和混淆的是有关该社会的一个特征性问题“面子”。这可能除了社会形态不同的因素外，西方的文化里面没有与“面子”和“丢脸”相对应的概念。

　　从原始的一个层面上来看，“面子”是指某个人在“公众面前的声誉”：当一个独立的个体与其他人共处的时候，他感到“有面子”的自我价值和尊严是由其得到尊敬的程度来体现的。

　　这个面子即可以给予也可以被拿走。一个人的自我价值并不是由他自己来界定，而是由其在其他人眼里的形象来界定。他可能因其遭到公开的羞辱而丢面子。一个人在公众眼里的形象非常关键。面子还可以通过公开赠送奖项来增送，虽然获得该奖项的人不一定确实赢得或理应得到该殊荣。给面子可以造成一个外在的假象，以此隐藏不愉快的感觉：形式先于内容。

　　西方关于个人的良知和心灵的理念，从历史上看来源于信仰----宗教蒴源以及个人继承的信仰，与其个人的社会地位或他与别人的关系无关。西方人似乎对于个体的关注大于对于群体的关注，而与此相反的事情则出现在中国。

　　一个个体的责任源自其自我的良知和信仰，而不在乎他在想什么。而在中国，一个个体似乎要对其他人负有责任。一旦同辈人遭受到极大的难堪，他也会感到蒙羞。可以说西方文化强调的是私人的罪过，而中国文化则更关注公开的羞辱。

　　进一步探究的话则会发现有更深层的差异。在中国的社会里，羞辱感比犯罪可能更显重要。个体内心的尊严应该是发自内心的，是否有罪的感受和认识也应是来自个人的判断，可是他却担心别人对其行为的看法。由此导致犯错被抓住看上去比犯错本身更糟糕。甚至是一个幼稚的行为看上去可能是错的也要予以避免。

　　我们可以观察过去的一些惯例。历史上的中国人首先是屈从于皇帝，其次是其家庭，再次是其长辈-----不管长辈是活着还是已经过世了。孩子们不能离开其父母而独立生活，他们只是父母的附属延续品。家庭成员彼此的关系缺乏平等，长久的等级观念是由年纪和社会地位决定的，一个家庭的长子拥有最优先的特权。错误的行为在家庭里面不仅仅影响某一个成员，而且影响整个家庭成员，无论他们活着还是已经死去。

　　一个独立个体的面子问题完全受到社会观念的左右。一旦他的行为被视为有某种不妥，面子就丢了，受到损毁的不仅是他个人，连带家庭名声也一同受到牵连。

　　履行社会义务是非常重要的保存面子的一个部分。保存面子重要性在于提升其社会的名望。在社会上越有名望的人越担心丢面子带来的风险。

　　似乎可以说有这样一种趋势：人们为了避免面子的尴尬可以不惜代价。他可能会为了保存面子而将真象歪曲或隐藏，甚至不承认所犯的错误，也可能不将他人置于尴尬处境就是为了“挽回面子”。

　　事实上，“face”在中国的社会有两个分开的但相关联的意思。一个是“面子”，，另外一个是“脸”。这两个都是在日常会话当中使用，而书写的使用较少。“脸”是社会给一个人德行的自信标签，而“面子”则表明社会对其声望的认知程度。

　　对于一个人来说，保存面子是非常重要的，因为面子等同于权利和影响，并可导致好感和亲善。一旦这个“脸”丢掉了，其结果是这个人的社会关系网中的信任随之丢失;同样的，没有了“面子”也就没有了权威。

　　举个例子：假如一个同事被大家议论为工作涣散，他只是丢“脸”，而非丢“面子”。经常打断上司的谈话使其丢了“面子”，而不是丢“脸”。

　　为了回避冲突，中国人一般会避免将令某人尴尬的事情公布于众，免得他丢面子。

　　需要说明的是，类似面子的观念日本和韩国的文化也存在，并非中国独有。

　　亚历山大•朱利安•克鲁 2007年1月

　　本文的作者亚历山大•朱利安•克鲁，英国艺术评论家和策展人，目前居住和生活在北京宋庄小堡村。他曾在英国斯坦福爱纹的威廉莎士比亚语法学校学习，获艺术史和哲学学士学位。自2001年起就在中国居住、旅游、写作和工作。2006年他应邀参加中国国家电视台英语频道CCTV9讨论当代中国艺术的节目，为路透社在北京798艺术区组织了一个图片展览。

　　The Concept of ‘Face’

　　For any visitor to China, one of the most bewildering and confusing aspects of

　　society here is the social characteristic known as ‘face'. This is mainly due to the fact that apart from other social differences, there simply is no exact equivalent of ‘face’ or ‘losing face ’ in the culture of the West.

　　At a fundamental level‘face’can be understood as meaning ‘public reputation’,

　　whereby an individual person’s sense of self worth, esteem, is defined by the extent to which he feels he ‘has face’ in the presence of other people, how much respect his is given.

　　This notion of face can be both given and taken away. The sense of self worth is not defined by the individual, but by an individual’s image in the eyes of others, and can be lost especially by being publicly embarrassed. Public imagery is the key. Face can be granted to others by giving public tokens of respect even though those people might not even have earned or deserved them.

　　Giving face can create an outward reality to hide a less pleasant one: Form taking precedence over Content.

　　Western notions such as individual conscience individual soul, historically stemmed from belief religious origin, of the inherent value of the individual irrespective of his social standing, or relationship to others. Westerners seem to place more importance on an individual rather than group identity, whereas the reverse would appear to be the case in China.

　　An individual’s responsibility comes primarily from his own conscience, or belief, this being regardless of what his fellow men might think, whereas in China an individual is seemingly more responsible to others, to be shamed before his peers being an ultimate embarrassment. It could be said that Western culture stresses private guilt whilst Chinese culture emphasizes public shame.

　　This can be said to be an extension of a deeper difference that shame tends to be more important than guilt in Chinese society. That is, rather than be concerned with self-honesty, which is internal, and is motivated by a concern for a personal feeling sense of guilt, an individual will often worry more about how actions are seen by others. The consequences of being caught seem worse than the action itself. Even an innocent act that appears wrong is to be avoided.

　　We can look to the past for a precedent: historically in China, an individual was subservient first to the emperor, then to his family, and then to his elders, both deceased and living. Children had no right to live independently from their parents, they were a subordinate extension. Relationships were not seen in terms of equality, but in terms of an endless hierarchy defined by age and social status, primacy given to the most senior male member of the family. Improper behaviour by member of the family reflected not simply on one member, but on all the family, both alive and dead.

　　This concept of face puts the individual at the mercy of the society’s demands, and should behaviour be deemed judged lacking, then face is lost, damaging the individual and, by connection, his family’s social standing.

　　Fulfilling social obligations is a critical component of maintaining face, and as the importance of maintaining face increases with social standing, the more socially prominent an individual is, the more the more at risk and vulnerable he is to losing face.

　　It is difficult, but we can even go so far as to say that there is a tendency to avoid embarrassing situations no matter what the cost ~ an individual may be willing to bend or hide the truth in order to save face, may not willingly admit that they are wrong, and might not bring others into potentially embarrassing situations in order to ‘save face ’.

　　In fact, ‘face’ refers to two separate but related concepts in Chinese social relations. One is ‘ mianzi ’ (面子), the other is ‘ lian ’ (脸). Both are used commonly in everyday speech rather than in formal writing.

　　‘Lian ' is the confidence society places in a person's moral character, whilst

　　‘mianzi’represents the social perception of an individual’s prestige.

　　For a person to maintain face is important with because face translates into power and influence and affects goodwill. A loss of ‘lian ’would result in a loss of trust within a social network, while a loss of ‘mianzi’ would result in a loss of authority. For example ~ gossiping about a colleague time-wasting at work would cause a loss of ‘lian’ but not ‘mianzi’. Interrupting your boss repeatedly as he is speaking may cause the boss a loss of ‘mianzi ’but not ‘lian’.

　　When trying to avoid conflict, Chinese people in general will avoid causing another person to lose ‘mianzi’by not mentioning embarrassing facts publicly. On the other hand, when a challenge is made to authority, or another person's standing within a community, Chinese will often attempt to cause a loss of

　　‘lian’or‘mianzi’.

　　It must be noted that this concept also exists in similar fashion in the cultures of both Korea and Japan, and is not exclusively Chinese.

　　Alexander Crowe, January 2007

　　This review is written by Alexander Julian Crowe, a British art critic and exhibition planner, who both lives and works in the artists'village in Xiaopu, Songzhuang. With a degree in the history of Art and Philosophy, he also attended the William Shakespeare grammar school in Stratford-upon-Avon, UK, and has been living, travelling, and writing in China since 2001. In 2006 he appeared on the Chinese national television channel CCTV9 to discuss modern art in China, and also organised a photo exhibition for Reuters in the 798 art district of Beijing. For more details please visit the website www.100art.cn., where there is a personal introduction and biography.