پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 954 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,829 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 13,081,037 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 9,265,165 |
نشانه شناسی امر واقعی و نقش بازنمایی آن در خلق اثر هنری | ||
| پژوهش نامه گرافیک نقاشی | ||
| دوره 7، شماره 12، شهریور 1403، صفحه 4-16 اصل مقاله (1.1 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/pgr.2023.42974.1203 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| فرشته دیانت* | ||
| استادیار گروه ارتباط تصویری، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| برخی آثار هنری با بازنمایی و جایگزینی با موضوع عادی و غیر هنری در پی بیان مفهومی جدید هستند تا مخاطب را به اندیشیدن پیرامون زندگی روزمره فرا خوانند. بنابراین، این مقاله با طرح این پرسش که «چگونه موضوعات روزمره منجر به دلالت‌های معنایی و ابژه هنری شده و مخاطب را به اندیشیدن در مورد پدیدههای عادی و معمولی زندگی روزمره فرا می‌خوانند»، بر آن است تا با نشانهشناسی آثار به اهمیت و چگونگی تولید اثر هنری با استفاده از موضوعات از پیش حاضر و روزمره بپردازد. بنا به یافته‌های این پژوهش می‌توان بیان داشت، از آن‌جایی که اثر هنری فقط به‌واسطه ارتباط با عنصر واقعی قابل شناخت و تفسیر است، عنصر روزمره یا امر واقعی، سند انگاشته شده و همچنین آثار هنری با نمایش و جانشینی ابژه اصلی، نه تنها با بیان ایده، بلکه با استفاده از روشهایی چون آشناییزدایی، ساختارشکنی، تأکید و جانشینی بر عنصر روزمره و مکان نمایش اثر هنری به معنا و مفهومی جدید دست یافته و ایجاد شگفتی میکنند. این آثار هنری (عکسها) با تأکید بر امر روزمرهای که بر اثر تکرار ملالآور شدهاند، معناسازی کرده و مخاطب را به تأمل وامیدارند. یافته‌های این بررسی که به عوامل تأثیرگذار و مقایسه آن‌ها در آثار مختلف میپردازد، به‌صورت جداگانه در جدول شماره یک ارائه شده‌است. نمونههای موردی مشتمل بر آثار ویکتور برگین، مهران تمدن، ویلیام آناستازی، فرهاد فخریان، کنت جوزفسن، رابرت اسمیتسون هستند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها: نشانهشناسی؛ امر واقعی؛ عکاسی؛ بازنمایی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The Semiotics of the Real Object and the Role of Its Representation in Making Artworks | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Fereshteh Dianat | ||
| Assistant Professor, Department of Graphic Design, Faculty of Art, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Some artworks seek to express a new concept by representing and replacing the everyday subject to invite the audience to reflect on everyday life. In view of this, this article intends to deal with the importance and method of producing artwork using present and everyday topics through the method of qualitative semiotics. By raising the question of how everyday issues lead to semantic implications and artistic objects, they invite the audience to reflect on the normal phenomena of everyday life. According to the findings of this research, it can be acknowledged that since the work of art can be known and interpreted only by the relationship and through the relationship with the real element, the everyday element or the real thing is considered a document, as well as the works of art with the representation and substitution of the object. The original, not only by expressing the idea but also by using methods such as defamiliarization, deconstruction, emphasizing and replacing the everyday element and the place of display of the artwork, achieve new meaning and concept and create surprises. These works of art create meaning by emphasizing the everyday things that have become boring due to repetition and encourage the audience to reflect. The results of this study, which deals with the influencing factors and their comparison in different works, are shown separately in Table No. 1. Case examples: Victor Burgin, Mehran Tamadon, William Anastasia, Farhad Fakhrian, Kenneth Josephsen, Robert Smithson. Changing the direction of familiar rules in art requires crossing the range of familiar processes of the past and defamiliarizing them. In explaining his reflections, Charles Sanders Peirce calls the symbolic process the interaction between semiotics property, interpretation, and representation. In other words, the signification process is an interaction that exists continuously between signs and the outside world, signs in relation to each other, and signs with their audience. Based on this, paying attention to the common relationships between defamiliarization and the symbolic process leads to a more appropriate understanding and acceptance of artistic creation, which is based on the system of signs above all else. Because the system of signs, at the same time as it examines its structural features based on the process of its origin, its meaning, and applications, always establishes a relationship with different processes of perception. Perception is a way of discovering that in its evolutionary process and in the transition from the objective form of the sign in order to receive its inner meaning, it always establishes a changing and variable interaction with thought, imagination, and experience. Showing the objects of daily life and inviting the audience to reflect and think about them in such a way can lead to the creation of conceptual art, the most important aspect of which is thought and reflection on the mundane matters of life. Also, since the subject of the works of daily life is completely derived from the real thing, with the most similarity to the subject, they are considered to be symbolic signs, which sometimes play the role of a symbol and sometimes only through expression with a new media (photography or painting). They have found the role of index plays a fundamental and central role in conveying the meaning and concept of the artwork. The study of works of art, whose subject and centrality are taken from the heart of everyday life, is the source of writing this article. Also, by studying the theories of deconstructionists such as Roman Jakobson and modern semiotics such as Peirce, we can conclude that the use of media (especially photography and painting) to represent every day and also the use of symbolic meanings plays a fundamental role in some works of art. Getting rid of the habit and repetition of everyday life and mundane subjects and taking refuge in imagination and also using the power of thought in creating artwork helps artists. For this purpose, the works of Iranian and non-Iranian artists have been used as examples and better presentations. Research method: This article was written using the method of semiotics, and the method of collecting its sources was literature review. Semiotics Semiotics is one of the important forms of semiotics (Ezkia, 1396:169). It can also be acknowledged that semiotics is one of the most common and valuable research methods. And in fact, it can be claimed that semiotics is a method that every researcher is somehow related to. In this method, there is no need to collect information. In fact, the information already exists and only needs to be deduced or analysed. In this method, the role of the researcher's thinking is more than his theories and information (Saroukhani, 2013: 279). In fact, semiotics is a way of classifying signs and describing the explicit content of the message (Krippendorf, 2013: 217). Semiotics is a method to recognize and highlight the important points of a text (or photo, video, etc.) (Saroukhani, 2013: 281). One of the common techniques in semiotics is the use of signs. According to Peirce, the index has a causal link with the event that is considered its sign - such as smoke, which represents fire - rather than based on a symbol or simile (Krippendorf, 1383: 57). In the qualitative semiotics method, the researcher is trying to establish a balance between description and interpretation (Ezkia, 2016:229). In short, the semiotics method has evolved into a scientific method that promises to yield conclusions obtained from symbolic and communication data. The semiotics looks for two types of reality: the reality of the data and the reality of what the researcher wants to know. These two facts do not interfere with semiotics, and the researcher must discover a way to consider analysable data as a symbol or sign. Perhaps, Stonehenge can be mentioned as the first example of the implementation of everyday things in order to create a work of art in everyday life and because of their implementation in open spaces and unpaid procedures. This work creates a kind of visual transition between the earth and the sky, but because it is made by human hands and expresses cultural concepts, it is different from nature (Adams, 1392: 19). Levitt started drawing on the wall in 1968. Painting on paper and sticking it to the wall seemed natural, but painting directly on the brick or plaster of the wall made the design a part of the architecture of that space (Archer, 2018: 73). With the difference that his paintings were not from the same wall or environment. What is considered deconstructive in Levitt's work was the use of painting on non-conventional and non-art materials (bricks or walls), which was considered a new sign for citizens. A symbol of the application of art in everyday life. There was a time when the boundaries seemed clearer than this, the work of art was one thing and the things people said and wrote about it were another. Earlier, minimalism realized that the meaning of the art object, to a large extent, lies outside itself, in its relationship with the surrounding environment. And now, conceptualism brought criticism and analysis to the scope of art creation. At one time, we only saw paintings and sculptures in exhibitions, but today documents, documents, maps, photos, program explanations, and various information constitute the works of artists (ibid.: 80). According to the mentioned examples, the present article aims to introduce works that either their subject matter or their constituent material is not taken into consideration in everyday life. But when they become the subject of a work of art, they are considered art without any deficiency, only in the form of art, be it photography or painting. In this sample of works, the representation and replacement of the everyday thing with artwork that shows the same subject were one of the concerns of the artists to create the artwork. Audiences passing by the place every day and facing the same subject that they considered normal, now only through the raw material of the artwork in the form of a photo or painting, they defamiliarize it and by showing the work. And replacing it with everyday matters, they invite the audience to reflect on everyday phenomena. The necessity of deconstruction in order to "alienate" with methods such as forming ambiguity in the meaning of the work, eliminating visual habits, performing the artwork outside the gallery, or displaying non-artistic material in the gallery and paying more and more attention to everyday life. And the praise of the real thing and the place of representation or display of the work takes place. In this article, an attempt was made to discuss the works that the artist created by using the representation of the real element in everyday life, which is considered normal and the place where the work of art is displayed and made the audience think about the work of art, its raw material, the idea of formation and the world around it invites. In fact, this representation helps the viewer to have a better understanding of the world around him and to observe aspects of it that he has not paid attention to until now. What surprises the audience of these works the most are the symbolic signs of the works that were created without the slightest change or difference from the raw material or the real thing, and by displaying on the material accepted for the performance of the work of art or other places. Art has become a work of art. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Keywords: Semiotics, Real Object, Photography, Representation | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
منابع
احمدی، بابک (1383). حقیقت و زیبایی: درس‌های فلسفة هنر، چاپ هشتم، تهران: نشر مرکز.
احمدى، بابک (1370). ساختار و تأویل متن، تهران: نشر مرکز.
احمدى، بابک (1374). حقیقت و زیبایی: درس های فلسفه هنر، تهران: نشر مرکز.
آرچر، مایکل (1398). هنر بعد از 1960، ترجمه کتایون یوسفی، چاپ ششم، تهران: انتشارات حرفه هنرمند.
_آریان‌پور، امیر حسین (1394). اجمالی از تحقیق دربارة (جامعه شناسی هنر)، تهران: دانشکده هنرهای زیبا.
اسکروتون، راجر (1386). عکاسی و بازنمایی، ترجمه بابک محقق، تهران: فرهنگستان هنر.
آدامز، لوری (1393). روش شناسی هنر، ترجمه علی معصومی، چاپ سوم، تهران: موسسه فرهنگی پژوهشی چاپ و نشر نظر.
برت، آر، ال (1398). تخیل. ترجمه مسعود جعفری، چاپ دوم، تهران: نشر مرکز.
جانسون، هرست ولدمر؛ جنسن، آنتونی اف (1381). پست- مدرنیسم: هنر پست- مدرن، ترجمه مجید گودرزی، تهران: نشر عصر هنر.
چندلر، دانیال (1387). مبانی نشانه شناسی، ترجمه مهدی پارسا، چاپ دوم، تهران: انتشارات سوره مهر.
خیری، محمد (1389). اقتباس برای فیلمنامه (پژوهشی در زمینة اقتباس از آثار ادبی برای نگارش)، چاپ سوم، تهران: نشر سروش.
ژیژک، اسلاوی (1384). گزیده مقالات: نظریه، سیاست، دین، گزینش و ویرایش، مراد فرهاد پور، مازیار اسلامی و امید مهرگان، تهران: انتشارات گام نو.
سارکوفسکی، جان (1382). نگاهی به عکس ها، ترجمه فرشید آذرنگ، تهران: سمت
سجودی، فرزان (1392). مقالات اولین هم اندیشی نشانه شناسی هنر: نشانه شناسی لایه ای و کاربرد آن در تحلیل متن هنری، چاپ دوم، تهران: فرهگستان هنر.
سمیعآذر، علیرضا (1391). انقلاب مفهومی: تاریخ هنر معاصر جهان، تهران: نظر.
سونسون، گوران (1387). نشانه شناسی عکاسی، ترجمه: مهدی مقیم نژاد، تهران: نشر علم.
گیدنز، آنتونی؛ بردسال، کارل، (1393). جامعهشناسی، چاپ بیست‌ونهم، ترجمه حسن چاوشیان، تهران: نی
کهون، لارنس (1391). از مدرنیسم تا پست مدرنیسم. ترجمه عبدالکریم رشیدیان، چاپ نهم، تهران: نشر نی.
گراندبرگ، اندی (1392). بحران واقعیت: در باب عکاسی معاصر، ترجمه مسعود ابراهیمی مقدم و مریم لدنی، چاپ دوم، تهران: موسسه تألیف، ترجمه و نشر آثار هنری فرهنگستان هنر (متن).
لچت، جان (1383). پنجاه متفکر بزرگ معاصر، ترجمه محسن حکیمی، چاپ سوم، تهران: انتشارات خجسته.
لینتون، نوربرت (1383). هنر مدرن. ترجمه علی رامین، چاپ دوم، تهران: نشر نی.
مارزونا، دانیل (1390). هنر مفهومی. ترجمه منصوره عبادی، تهران: نشر نظر.
مکاریک، ایرنا ریما (1384). دانشنامه نظریه های ادبی معاصر. ترجمه مهران مهاجر و محمد نبوی، تهران: آگه.
ویلکینسون، رابرت (1388). هنر، بیان، احساس. ترجمه امیر مازیار، چاپ دوم، تهران: آثار هنری متن
References
_ Adams, L., (2013). “Art Methodology”. Translate by Ali Masoumi, Tehran: Nazar. (Text in persion).
_Ahmadi, B.,(1993). “Truth and Beauty”. Tehran: Center. (Text in persion).
_Ahmadi, B., (2005). “The text-Structure and textual interpretation”. Tehran: Center. (Text in persion).
_Anthony F, J., (1913). “History oF Art”. Tehran: Time of Art. (Text in persion).
_ Archer, M., (2020). “Art after 1960”. Tehran: Herfeh: Honarmand. (Text in persion).
_Arianpour, A.( 2012). “Sociology of Art”. Tehran: Gostareh. (Text in persion).
_Scruton, R., (2008). “Photography and representation”, Translate by Babak Mhaghegh, Thehran: Art Academy. (Text in persion).
_Barret, R.L., (2020). “Fancy and imagination”, Tehran: center. (Text in persion).
_Cahoone, L.E., (2013), “From modernism to post modernism”: an anthology, translated by: Abdolkarim Rashdian, Tehran: Ney. (Text in persion).
-Chandler, D. (2001). Semiotics (The Basic), USA & Canada: Routledge.
_Dewey, J., (1958). “Art as Experience”, New Yourk, Capricon Books, G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
_Giddens, A., (2002). “Sociology”. Tehran: Ney. (Text in persion).
_ Grundberg, A., (2014), “Crisis of the real: writings on photography since 1974”, translated by: Masoud Ebrahimi Mogadam & Maryam Ladoni, Tehran; Art Academy. (Text in persion).
_Kheiri, M., (2011), “Adaptation for the Screenplay”. Tehran: Soroush. (Text in persion).
_Lechte, J., (2003). “Fifty key contemporary thinkers”. Tehran: Kkojasteh. (Text in persion)._Lynton, N., (2005), “The story of Modern art”, translated by: Ali Ramin, Tehran: Ney. (Text in persion).
_Makaryk, I, R., (2015), “Encyclopedia of Contemporary Litrary Theory”, translated by: Mehran Mohajer and Mohammad Nabavi, Tehran: Agah. . (Text in persion).
_Marzane, D., (2002), “Conceotual art”, translated by: Fatemeh Ebadi, Tehran: Nazar. (Text in persion)
_Marzona, D., (2005). Conceptual Art, Cologne: Taschen.
_Pierce, C., (1931-58). Collected Writings, In Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss and Aurthur w Burks (Eds.), Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
_Sarukhani, B., (2015), “Reaserch Methods in Social Sciences”, Volum 1, Tehran: Institude of
Shklovsky, V. (1965). “Art as Technique.” In Lee T. Lemon and Marion J. Reis (Eds.), Russian Formalist Criticism: Four Essays (pp. 3-25), Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
_Sonesson, G., (2008). “Semiotics of Photography”. Teran: Science. (Text in persion).
_Sojoudi, F., (2011). “Semiotics of Art. Tehran”: Academy of Art. (Text in persion).
_Strazny, P., (2005). Encyclopedia of linguistics, Vol (1), Fitzroy Dearborn, New York & Oxon: Taylor and Francis Group.
_Wilkinson, R., (2008), “Art,Emotion & Expression”, Tehran: Academy of Art. (Text in persion).
_Zizek, S., (2006), “Selected Articles”: Theory, Politics, Religion, Tehran: New Step. . (Text in persion).
URLs:
URL1: www.akkasee.com
URL2: www.akkasee.com
URL3: www.akkasee.com
URL5: www.honaragah.com
URL6: www.honaragah.com
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 294 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 188 |
||