نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار گروه نقاشی، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران، نویسنده مسئول
2 دکتری پژوهش هنر، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران.
3 دانشجوی دکتری پژوهش هنر ، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Throughout the history of art, artistic works have always been described on the basis of the internal and external qualities of the work. In aesthetic analysis, scholars have always tried to define art with a specific feature that is the common ground for all the works of art; with the study of paleontology and genealogy in the description of artwork, two general views on dealing with the explanation of the values of the work of art can be recognized: First, the "formalism 1" view, which is important in explaining the effects of apparent and formal features of color, composition, and so on. And the other approach to it is the cultural and social context of producing the work and information about the artist which are important in determining the value of artworks and is known as “Contextualism ". According to the theory of formalism, it is only the appearance of a work of art that can affect its aesthetic value, but opponents of the formalist view emphasize on the importance of the cultural origin of the work (art) in understanding the work of art. This group argued that authenticity is only one aspect of the aesthetic value that the theory cannot bear in its description. In terms of texture, any awareness of the history of the work of art, its cultural function and its emotional qualities affects our perception of its aesthetic value. Contextualism advocates insist on the fact that the work of art is not only due to its appearance, which is also valuable in its connection with culture; But if we try to extract the indicators for the valuation of works of art, the adoption of each one-sided views does not result in a comprehensive and complete outcome for the purpose of the above mentioned. Therefore, it is necessary to refer to a comprehensive and pluralistic theory. Each of the above views, with their specific absolutism, prevents it from being cited as a reference theory in the evaluation of works of art.
However, if we are looking for a single and comprehensive way of identifying works of art in order to provide a consistent model in describing and evaluating works of art in seven stages, we must use a method that also describes the characteristics arising from the form of works and express the value and originality of the culture and context of the content from which the work is produced. From the historiographers’ point of view, our knowledge of the originality of the work affects our aesthetic sense, and from the formalists' point of view, our knowledge of the originality and identity of the work of art depends on its appearance.
The hypothesis of the present paper is that those who respect the formal values of the work, only emphasize the formal features of the work and the texturing advocates, by highlighting the cultural features of the effect, provide a one-sided and incomplete explanation of the indicators that influence the assessment of artwork. The American philosopher Nelson Goodman, by addressing the topic of "identity conditions for artwork," offers a new, pluralistic explanation of the attributes of valuation in artwork, which can be seen as a departure from the one-dimensionality of two formalism views and texture.
The present study, using descriptive-analytical method and library information gathering tool, intends to identify the main components in the classification and identification of artwork. In order to address this, he reconsider textual and formalistic theories in valuing artwork. In the end, Nelson Goodman's compilation theory is presented as a conceptual framework for explaining the features of the work of art, using the theory to extract the characteristic Essential in classifying artwork. This article emphasizes the theories of formalists and contextualists and the opposition of their views in measuring the main components of works of art escaped the reading of Nelson Goodman's theory of integration as a solution to this opposition. The findings of this study lead to the hypothesis that the two perspectives of formalism and texturalism in Nelson Goodman's pluralistic view are combined with the four components of "formal elements", "theme and content", "history of the work of art" and Cultural function is influential in the originality, identity and value of the work.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)