參考資料
收藏著錄@#@石渠寶笈初編(養心殿),上冊,頁471-472@#@@#@收藏著錄@#@故宮書畫錄(卷三),第一冊,頁227-231@#@@#@參考書目@#@1.何傳馨,〈元鮮于樞論張旭懷素高閑草書〉,收入何傳馨編,《書法之美特展圖錄》(臺北:國立故宮博物院,1992年五月初版一刷),頁77。
2.何傳馨,〈大汗的世紀 趙孟頫鮮于樞墨蹟合冊〉,《故宮文物月刊》,第223期(2001年10月),頁18-19。
@#@@#@內容簡介(中文)@#@鮮于樞。西元一二四六至一三0二。字伯機。漁陽人。至元間以材選為江浙行省都事。後官太常寺典簿。意氣豪邁。善詞賦。工行書及畫。 趙孟頫云。余與伯機同學草書。伯機過余遠甚。極力追之而不能及。伯機已矣。世乃稱僕能書。所謂無佛處稱尊也。可謂推服之甚矣。此帖僅五十三字。而使轉縱橫。遒勁之甚。正不覺其少也。@#@@#@內容簡介(中文)@#@鮮于樞(西元一二四六至一三0二年),字伯機,漁陽(今今天津薊縣一帶)人。至元間以材選為江浙行省都事,後官太常寺典簿。意氣豪邁,善詞賦。工行書及畫。趙孟頫云:「余與伯機同學草書,伯機過余遠甚,極力追之而不能及,伯機已矣,世乃稱僕能書,所謂無佛處稱尊也。」可謂推服之至。此帖論唐代張旭、懷素、高閑及宋代黃庭堅草書,崇唐抑宋,運筆使轉縱橫,可見到懷素草書影響。
(20121017)@#@@#@內容簡介(英文)@#@ Xianyu Shu (style name Boji) was a native of Yuyang (around modern Jixian, Tianjin). Based on ability, he was chosen for the Jiangsu-Zhejiang Branch Secretariat, later rising to Archivist in the Court of Imperial Sacrifices. Bold in manner, he was gifted at poetry, running script, and painting. Zhao Mengfu once said, “Boji and I studied cursive script, but Boji far surpassed me. Exerting utmost effort, I still could not catch up. Alas, he is now gone. People say I am able in calligraphy. Such is when an exalted one has left.” It shows how much Zhao venerated Xianyu. This is a discourse on the cursive of 3 Tang calligraphers and Huang Tingjian of the Song. In praising the Tang over Song, the brushwork is compelling in its turns, showing the influence of Huaisu.
(20121017)@#@@#@內容簡介(英文)@#@Hsien-yu Shu was a native of Yu-yang, Hopei. His style name was Po-chi. On the basis of his ability he was chosen assistant provincial secretary of Kiangsu and Chekiang, and later served as a high official to the Mongols. His deportment was unrestrained. Excelling in the composition of verse, his semi-cursive script and painting were also excellent. Chao Meng-fu (1254-1322) once said: "Po-chi and I studied cursive script together. He excelled me by far. Exerting my utmost effort, I still could not catch up with him. Alas, he is now no more. And people today say that I have ability in calligraphy. Such is the case when the exalted one has left the scene." This essay contains only 53 characters, but in the compelling turns and the vertical and horizontal movements, there is a most powerful energy, so that one feels the piece to be not at all brief.