点击右上角
微信好友
朋友圈
请使用浏览器分享功能进行分享
聚焦铁路元素 非遗传承人砖雕上刻“乡愁”******
(新春走基层)聚焦铁路元素 非遗传承人砖雕上刻“乡愁”
中新网商丘2月1日电 题：聚焦铁路元素 非遗传承人砖雕上刻“乡愁”
中新网记者 韩章云
“叮叮叮……”小锤敲击着刻刀在青砖上留下清晰的刻痕，凿刻出的灰尘被毛刷轻轻扫到一旁，潘明生埋头于手上的砖雕，不问外事。
“春节假期一直在庙会上忙着展示，现在难得坐在工作室做砖雕。”今年50岁的潘明生是河南省商丘市非物质文化遗产归德砖雕代表性传承人。他还有另外的身份——中国铁路郑州局集团有限公司郑州供电段商丘供电车间的电工。
潘明生从事砖雕技艺20余年，工作之余，他几乎把所有的时间用于砖雕制作、技艺传承。在平面砖雕的基础上，他创新立体微雕，一块块青砖经过精心凿刻，通过拼接组成一座座微型四合院、农家小院、古城……
潘明生对自己的砖雕作品进行细致调整。 受访者供图“陇海线上的老铁路桥、老商丘火车站，以及见证铁路变迁的蒸汽机车、电力机车、复兴号动车等，都会通过砖雕艺术呈现，争取明年与大家见面。”目前，潘明生正全力创作一组反映中国铁路发展的砖雕作品。
谈及创作历程，潘明生介绍，20多年前，他首次接触砖雕即着迷。传统砖雕作品纤巧的花纹、玲珑的构造、厚重的质感令他叹服，并为之进行持续的钻研、创作。
在砖雕作品的构思创作中，潘明生更倾向于复刻记忆里的古城、儿时的乡村风貌以及具有代表性的古建筑。为力求真实，他一次次实地考察、拍照、画图，查阅老照片等，希望用砖雕的方式留下老建筑的历史韵味，为观者留下一缕乡愁。
其中，潘明生用青砖复刻的“商丘古城归德府陈家大院”，屋顶的神兽、亭台楼阁的构造甚至墙面纹饰，与实物别无二致，而微型景观让观众更能直观感受传统古建筑的精巧布局与厚重乡情。
春节期间，潘明生在庙会上为观众介绍砖雕文化。 受访者供图不过，砖雕创作并非易事。青砖经多年风化质地脆弱，雕刻时一不小心就容易崩断，只能从头再来。“从事砖雕技艺，必须吃得了苦、耐得住寂寞。”尽管辛苦，只要坐在工作台前，潘明生常常忘记时间，“一眨眼工夫天就黑了，所以也就不觉得砖雕枯燥”。
如今，潘明生创作的微型砖雕作品已达百余组，其中《商丘古城》《老家的院子》《长城》等作品被多地博物馆、非遗馆收藏并展出。
“古老的砖雕艺术传递的本就是人们对美好生活的向往，现代砖雕依然蕴含这样的价值观。”潘明生介绍，在砖雕创作、技艺传承的路上他会一直坚持下去，“我期待用砖雕的艺术形式记录历史，为大家留下美好的记忆。”(完)
中新网评：处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事****** 中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称，将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对，企图将核污水“一倒了之”，把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。  资料图：日本福岛第一核电站。2011年，福岛核电站事故发生后，大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋，对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害，数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日，作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。 日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由，在2021年4月13日，正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多，日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。 日本政府辩称，这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全，甚至“可以喝”，这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。 事实上，经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质，核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收，长期来看，将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁，最终危害人类健康。 因此，核污水排海计划推出后，遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示，福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中，约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场，反对该计划。 日本政府认为，核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案，但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海，核污水会随着洋流流动，其影响势必会跨越国界，危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。 《韩国经济新闻》发文称，相关研究认为，福岛核污水如果排放入海，约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域，该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。 德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告，若日本将所有核污水排入海中，不到半年，整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁，包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。 日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国，有义务保护海洋环境。然而，在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上，日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。 国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估，但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论，并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下，日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设，这是极不负责任的行为。 太平洋不是日本的下水道，日本必须正视各方合理关切，在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后，制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远，若只顾眼前，执意将核污水排放入海，不仅其自身，周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单，其后果必将会危害数代人。  Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business By John Lee (ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year. Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business. The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year. The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public. In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run. Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public. The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution. The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community. The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses. According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan. As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment. However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact. Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad. The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies. If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence. 
|
)