About Critical Research WORKS OF ART

T. Fisanovich

About Critical Research WORKS OF ART

It is widely believed that the perception of works of art is truly individual character. This controversial idea is often taken a priori, whereas, in my view, requires an integral approach to the assessment of product creativity. Here are two great masters of expression, are proud of the domestic creative elite.

Marc Chagall: "Nothing I was so disgusted in the art, like the brain, Joseph Brodsky:" History of Art - is the story ... enhance the prospects of human attitude, concentration, or more often, condensation means of expression. Each new psychological or aesthetic reality instantly obsolete for the next embarking on this lesson.

So what really is most important for an aesthetically biased nature - an emotional outburst, sensual pleasure of an individual or intellectualism, an attempt to determine the social significance of the work, reflect on its role and place in the world of our senses?

Getting acquainted with the talented work of art, falling under its charm, natural feel admiration and delight. For a man, located in the exclusively sensory and emotional perception of creativity, this, in fact, enough. However, connoisseurs of art, are susceptible to rational analysis, and, moreover, professional critics, also experienced a rise of emotion, trying to determine the aesthetic value of the wizard, its value as an object of art. This applies equally to works of painters and sculptors, writers and composers, filmmakers and theater professionals, architects and designers. This assessment is particularly relevant today, when, in general, comparable to the realities around us, and therefore understandable realism coexists with various isms, in some cases are not based on direct analogues in everyday life ..
Subjective motivation to type "like" or "dislike" with a considerable degree of probability, will meet as a meaningful objection and will not solve the problem.

 Therefore need the correct methodology of the study strongly confirm or cast down the status of the product under consideration as an object of art. However, professionals often do not hesitate to declare that they have a glance to determine the artistic value of the submitted works. Indeed, in their assessments, they rely primarily on professionalism - experience and aesthetic sense. This confirms once again the indisputable fact that the critical study today is built on the subjective perception of art.

Q: Are there objective methodology of such analysis, by whom she worked, what it is? With all the richness and diversity of works of world art and not a smaller number of critical works on this day, developed a common, sound science, art methodology for their evaluation. Is such a methodology? Does not appear meaningless, self-confidence or, worse, a sacrilege to attempt to develop it? In any case, the discussion of this question seems appropriate.

Since the discussion seems to be mentioned, when the art of the reason for his appearance and its role in the development of human society. There are two possible perception of the external world and self: sensory-emotional and rational-rational. In I. Brodsky (Nobel Lecture ".1987), respectively called intuitive and analytical methods of cognition of the objective world. Here we do not consider occult presentation (otherwise - a revelation), relating to the unreal spheres.

Modern science connects with the beginning of the formation of human labor. Even the most basic labor operations required from the ancient protocheloveka original speculative ratio source material and final product of labor. In other words, since some business (handling sticks, stones, skins of killed animals, etc), the employee had previously imagined that would result in his work. Thus the ancient people in their activities was sure to develop and use elements of abstract thinking. Abstract thinking, acquired in the course of employment, facilitate the adaptation of humanity in an ever-changing environmental conditions.

Sensuous-emotional understanding of reality (ie, feeling and, as a rule, immediate reaction to it), inherited by humans from the animal world. Originally it was a major opportunity as the perception of the environment, and self-knowledge. Of course, constantly engaged in practical activities (labor, defense, education of children, etc.), humanity is at the same time accumulating skills in the abstract, analytical thinking. But first a sensual apparatus of cognition was bound to prevail over analytical.

Due to sensory perception, emotional and motor responses gradually develop the ability to respond to the versatile real-world signals. People, like animals, could not only be more or less adequately respond to them, but eventually began to acquire a purely human skills balanced (intellectually-analytical) approach to the objective phenomena. On the other hand, work together with the retention and improvement of management practices contributed to knowledge and skills for an analytical approach to sensory perceptions.

Sharing vital information (such as: the danger, food, search mesta park, etc.). And the need to separate personal emotions from the tribe of primitive man (pain, fear, joy earner, etc.) is still apparent, before mankind is able to draw on intellectually-analytical method of learning and mapping of the objective world. It was then followed by a speech first appeared, more primitive rock paintings, sculpture, hunting and fighting ritual dance, music, etc. So sensual and emotional perception of the objective world lies at the core of what we now call art.
Influencing the sensual realm, the primitive art of the ancient man, you can play is obvious - form, color, sound (at least in the form of onomatopoeia), the kinematics of human, animal, etc. Even in the early stages of this art made it possible to express our attitude to that shown to the object or phenomenon, embellishing or emptied it.

Later came the ability to domyslivat, complementary observation unrelated to the particular event is real or fantastic scenes. So, for example, built legends, parables, ballads, etc., which often take place and a time shift, and fantastic inventions. Even the primitive art was set by the phenomenon of the real world, keeping the idea of them for posterity and providing material for historians. As a means of expression, it naturally reflects the emotional state and characterized especially sensory perception contemporaries. The emerging art of prehistoric times, acquire the ability to form emotional sphere and improve the susceptibility of contemporaries, to induce the human mind to other levels of perception and the way the real world.

Even in those ancient times, art served the purposes of education and organization of society and, in the language of our days, is an instrument of agitation and propaganda. These possibilities of art is constantly used and used up to now. Examples: church, palace commissioned by the ideological service of political organizations and states painting, sculpture, architecture, music, fiction, drama, performing arts, fashion and much more. Regulated, depleted given the art of the passage of time led to his emasculation, stagnant, limited and gradually exhausted the creative aspirations of the masters. Only a very gifted person - geniuses of art - were able to overcome the limitations and prohibitions, and, notwithstanding the administrative attacks and helpful criticism of reactionaries, to find unexplored ways.

Critical evaluation of own and public achievements, no doubt, cultivate the parallel acquisition of skills and mastering techniques of creative activity. In fact, progress is impossible without the critical thinking errors and failures and their subsequent exclusion. Rather, the criticism of works of art of the primitive era (and even later) was of a utilitarian nature. "It worked" image totem: a successful hunt, abundant harvest, victorious war, safely born heir - the criticism was of a positive nature.

But the failures and disasters can turn to have made a cult figure who has performed ritual dances and so on., Hard, bloody criticism (to take, at least, cults of the Maya, Inca). Even closer to our times, an architect, when tested, for example, the bridge often instructed to stand in the Newbuilding. And how many works of art were destroyed by the Inquisition (sometimes along with their creators) in medieval times. This "criticism" of art has recently been widely practiced by totalitarian regimes.

Professional criticism of art in ancient and medieval times did not exist. Some critical comments embedded in the work of historians and philosophers of the time, but no more. The emergence of critical studies of works of art, which were self-focused, is only possible in a developed society, a new and modern times, has gathered a significant cultural and historical baggage, and have an opportunity to compare the arts of various epochs and peoples.

Assessment of works of art, regardless of which sort of art it belongs, seems no less difficult than the creation of the work. This statement is not a paradox when it comes to deep, balanced and comprehensive assessment of the object of art. There is widespread belief that the critics are people, victims fiasco on creative endeavors. Say, if a critic has the right to claim the unconditional approval or condemnation of undisputed work of art?

What a unmistakably how exactly his conclusion corresponds to the true quality of the object of criticism? Often in circles close to modern art, express the view that the full expression master must be independent of the critics and blindly go in his works selected by them. While not objecting in principle to the freedom of creativity, to think that this argument is completely valid only for unskilled criticism.

Criticism - the ability to see, understand and specify not only the obvious, but, more importantly, hidden merits and defects of the object of research. The purpose of criticism - to penetrate into the essence of the work under review, revealing his true place in art, noting it contains new features sensual and emotional perception of the world, its value to the comprehension of the human spirit, its objective meaning for modern man and society of the future. The work of the critic is akin to the work of the teacher and in this respect requires not only high professionalism but also (especially!) The ability to special creative state - the ability to foresee.

Of course, the foregoing should not be taken as a rigid scheme. Modern man is multi-faceted. And artists do not avoid the intellectually-analytical approach to understanding the world, and art critic, of course, characteristic of sensory and emotional perception of a work of art. Just every kind of activity has its own preferences. As the creative work of art is due to sensory and emotional susceptibility wizard, it should give a rational criticism of the definition of a significant work of art, in other words, to translate the intuitive perception of the language of rational comprehension of reality.

It emerged at the dawn of mankind. The word, as a necessary means of communication in society, at least to improve the linguistic baggage made it possible to transmit not only the purely pragmatic information. Through word became possible transcription intuitive sense in abstract terms. People learned the words to display (initially primitive, timid) aesthetic perception and observation, and within, and ethical representation. Speech, colored by emotion, set the stage using the word as a means of art.

Gradually the folklore - the first manifestation of art expression, the forerunner of later literature emerged. And, becoming a means of expressing human spirituality, artistic, philosophical, historical literature, rhetoric, theatrical declamations and other forms of art expression should always verify the universal laws of critical analysis, if any. Apparently, in general, you can determine at what today are based conclusions researcher works of art.

Psychological aspects of forming the focus of critical analysis, presented as follows:
- Epistemological component (ie the world of the critic, for example - purely religious, idealistic, metaphysical, dialectical, materialist);
- Aesthetic component (personal submission criticism of the beautiful
and the ugly);
- Ethical component (the concept of a specific criticism of morality);
- The social component (reflection of social attitudes criticism);
- Education (including - education, intelligence, traditions);
- Personality of the critic (talent, temperament, integrity, etc.).

These factors obviously can not provide an objective review of the research subject in any open-mindedness, candor and insight of the critic. Elements of the subjective approach will inevitably embedded in the structure analysis.
God forbid believe that the author of the article intends to compose a treatise on how criticism should conduct their investigation. No The creative work of criticism, obviously, will always be colored by his individual talent. It also represented an attempt to find methods of critical analysis of art objects, if possible, excluding the voluntarist interpretation of the investigational product. And if they can be developed, then they certainly should be objective and universal.

Most likely, some critics have identified for themselves and successfully use the appropriate objective approaches in their research. In this case, the problem is not so much to develop a methodology as to its application with the dialectical view of diachrony.
Because art emerged in the process of improving a person's ability to sensuously emotional perception of the objective world, it must be based on the realities of this world and to some extent reflect them.

Hence the criterion of art is certainly the practice in its dialectical development as a deepening and expansion of comprehension of the world and self-sensual-emotional means. If a certain work, claiming enter in the register of works of art, no man improves sensitivity is devoid of meaning, cognitive and aesthetic formative (educative) components, it is a failure, an impasse or banal speculation that has no right to claim a place in the true art.

In this formula there is no rejection of abstract art, do not portray the objectivity of the environment. Human consciousness long ago crossed the threshold of objective thinking, learned to operate on abstractions, not only in analytical, but also in the sensory-emotional sphere. Abstract thought is the exclusive attribute of humanity. But abstract ideas are autonomous. They have no tangible analogs. And indeed, as displayed abstract representations, but to desist from attempting to subject them to play? Only other abstractions, if more familiar and, if possible, towards more substantive texture. The game paints abstract artists, in rapid plastic figures of the sculptor-avant-garde, in relaxed contemporary music of recent decades is reflected spiritual and emotional expressions of our dynamic world, perceives and understands them.

Perhaps the questions to the subject of art should be formulated as follows:
- Signifies whether an item analysis of a new direction in art?
- Whether the original work or has an equivalent?
- Enriched with a range of our senses?
- Does our expanded the scope of emotional perception?
- Whether the investigational product, something new in our comprehension of the real world?
- совершенствует ли оно наши эстетические представления?
- развивает ли оно положения морали?
- уточнены и/или упорядочены уже знакомые, но ранее не систематизированные ощущения?

Если хотя бы один из перечисленных критериев может быть доказательно продемонстрирован, то имеются основания полагать, что означенное произведение способствует развитию искусства. Лишённая всех этих критериев, этих психологических и сенсорно познаваемых признаков работа не может быть признана в качестве уникального объекта искусства, не является образцом выдающегося творения. В общих чертах именно так представляются автору принципы оценки объекта искусства. При этом здесь сознательно опущено поле философских проблем, связанных с дихотомией критерия как нормы и конкретики искусства как отклонения от нормы.

Шедевры искусства всегда являются новацией, открытием, прорывом в совершенствовании нашей чувственно-эмоциональной сферы. Они оригинальны, неповторимы, не имеют и не могут иметь аналогов. Возможны лишь попытки тиражирования их копий („клише“ – по терминологии И.А.Бродского). Избегая мистических толкований, полагаю, что такие произведения представляют собой откровения человеческой духовности. Увы, их много меньше, нежели хотелось бы.

Однако, кроме уникальных произведений искусства имеется огромное количество добротных – дублирующих или подражательных – работ, не несущих печати исключительности, откровения. „Подражать, значит – уничтожить, во всяком случае – разрушить вещь, чтобы увидеть, как она сделана, украсть из неё тайну её жизни – и восстановить заново всё, кроме жизни“ (М.И.Цветаева. „Поэты с историей и поэты без истории“.1933).

Есть ученические работы прославившихся в будущем мастеров, прежде всего представляющие интерес для исследователей их творческого пути. Есть копии великих мастеров, выполненных в процессе изучения творческой манеры гения или по заказу его ценителя. Есть произведения представителей школы того или иного мастера. Есть, наконец, агитационные и декоративные работы, имеющие строго прикладное значение, и т.п. Они не могут претендовать на включение в реестр выдающихся произведений искусства, но их целевое назначение оправдывает их существование.

Скверно, когда лишённую искры таланта, не несущую эстетического и информативного зерна халтуру, суррогаты, поделки шарлатанов начинают назойливо рекламировать, «раскручивать» в качестве новаций в искусстве. Не встречая доказательной критики, опирающейся на научно обоснованные положения, эти «творения» пытаются провозгласить шедеврами – эталоном современного искусства, явно причиняя вред делу эстетического совершенствования человечества.

Автор далёк от тщеславной надежды разрешить в предлагаемой работе проблему объективного критического исследования произведений искусства. Сама постановка вопроса представляется достаточным основанием для появления такой статьи. Хотелось бы привлечь внимание искусствоведов и почитателей искусства к разработке названной темы. Предлагая к рассмотрению означенные аспекты, автор надеется получить критические замечания и дополнения и заранее выражает признательность принявшим участие в их обсуждении.


© Copyright: Тарас Фисанович, 2009