Цитата:
Сообщение от Peter
Art-lover, try to generalize on svoemu.Zhivopis on the ultimate goal (goal) of the expression can be divided into three kinds: material formospisyvayuschuyu (substantive), soul (or rather substantive than bezpredmetnuyu ) having an emotional impact, as well as spiritual (both substantive and abstract) Finding the spiritual element in painting is the highest of its content is not required in the contemplative experience of having prdmetnyh forms.
|
Ingarden does not use concepts such as spirituality, in this passage, he merely says that the abstract is present in any paintings, namely in the form of composition, color, pattern - for all this is a purely abstract concepts that are inherent in equal measure as a figurative and non-figurative image. The transition from the figurative to the non-figurative image is not as harsh as it may seem at first glance. That is, if this is illustrated by the example, the path from, say, Vermeer, Kandinsky is through a De Stael (Ingarden illustrates the interim, another example of the type of boundary - Villon (Villon), but it seems to me, de Stael is more suitable) Some paintings are not uniquely identify either as a figurative, not as abstract.
What you write, I think, relates more to the issue about which the same Ingarden wrote as a distinction between the aesthetic and artistic value of the product