masoud olia

The present article addresses the fundamental question of how the house chronotope, as a device for the analysis of text, opens up new interpretive possibilities. Basically referring to the continuum of time and space in literature and art, chronotope implies that time and space are not merely temporal and spatial categories but signify and have values attached to them. Following a descriptive-analytical method, the article has two sections: the first describes and defines the basic elements of the conceptual framework shaping Bakhtin’s discussion of chronotope, and the second examines Zoya Pirzad’s novel I Turn off the Lights in the light of the house chronotope. Moreover, the living room and kitchen chronotopes are examined in connection with the house chronotope (as the basic chronotope of the story). The article also shows that in the novel’s plot and interpretation, the house chronotope establishes a significant interaction with other important chronotopes, i.e., the threshold and encounter chronotopes. The article aims to demonstrate that the house chronotope reveals the characters’ mentalities and inner states by providing a proper space for the occurrence of events, and these events are expressed via temporal signs. Extended Abstract 1.IntroductionThe present article seeks to analyze the house chronotope in Zoya Pirzad’s I Turn off the Lights (Cheragh-ha ra Man Khamoush Mikonam) based on Bakhtin’s theory of literary chronotope. We will discuss how chronotope can serve as a tool for the analysis of the text, and will show the different ways in which it can be of help to the critic in analyzing a text. The house chronotope is of great importance in Pirzad’s novel, playing an important role in how the story develops. We have drawn upon Bakhtin’s definitions of different chronotopes and tried to identify their similarities in order study the house chronotope in this novel. 2.Theoretical Framework Chronotope is the interdependence among temporal and spatial relations, arranged through an artistic expression. In a literary or artistic work, different chronotopes and their complicated relationships can be identified. In this relationship, time and space do not exist independently and through specific instances of them, the experiences of characters can be defined in specific times and places. Therefore, it is through this relationship that a specific text offers a meaning to its creator or its readers. 3.MethodologyA qualitative study, the present article follows the descriptive-analytical methodology. Bakhtin’s theory of chronotope has been used here as a tool for the analysis of Pirzad’s I Turn off the Lights. The data was collected using the library sources. 4.Discussion and AnalysisThe house chronotope has been the basis for our analysis of Pirzad’s I Turn off the Lights. Throughout the story ‘house’ is referred to as a place that connotes various meanings, providing us with the possibility of analyzing different layers of the narrative in this novel. The everyday activities of the protagonist and her monologues occur within this chronotope, representing different aspects of her identity. Moreover, the relationship between this chronotope and other important chronotopes has been discussed in this article. 5.Conclusion In this novel, Pirzad strikes a balance between Clarice’s mental life and her inner life, thus making the arrangement of narration in the house chronotope possible. The representation of Clarice’s outer actions in this chronotope enables the reader to read into her mind. Pirzad creates the text based on her specific temporal and spatial conditions, while the readers recreate it based on their own spatial and temporal conditions. In other words, the chronotope turns into a tool for understanding the ways in which the spatial-temporal structures of the novel represent an independent world, the interpretation of which relies on the relationship between two worlds: the world of the text and the world of the meta-text. Select BibliographyPirzad, Z. 1380 [2001]. Cheragh-ha ra Man Khamoush Mikonam. Tehran: Markaz.Bakhtin, M. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Michael Holquist (ed.). Caryl Emerson and Micheal Holquist (trans.). Astin: University of Texas Press.Bakhtin, M. 1990. Art and Answerability: The Early Essays of M. M. Bakhtin. V. Liapunov and K. Brostrom (trans.).Texas: University of Texas Press.Bakhtin, M. 1993. Toward a Philosophy of the Act. V. Liapunov and M. Holquist (trans.). Texas: University of Texas Press.Bemong, N. and Borghart, P. (eds.). 2010. Bakhtin’s Theory of the Literary Chronotope: Reflections, Applications, Perspectives. Ghent: Academic Press. pp. 3-16.Heynes, D. J. 2002. “Bakhtin and the Visual Arts.” In: Smith, P. and C. Wilde (eds.). A Companion to Art Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. pp. 292-302.Holquist, M. 2002. Dialogism: Bakhtin and His World. London: Routledge.Keunen, B. 2000. “Bakhtin, Genre Formation, and the Cognitive Turn: Chronotopes as Memory Schemata.” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 2/2: 1-15.Morson, G. S. and Emerson, C. 1990. Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics. Standford: Standford University Press.

Focusing on Lukacs’s and Adorno’s ideas, this paper aims to clarify how the philosophical attitude of critical theory relates to the essay genre as a method. It firstly elaborates on essay as an emergent genre of modern philosophy, indicating that philosophy is extremely interwoven with its form of presentation. Accordingly, form, language, and stylistic features are irreducible to chimerical or ornamental appearances; it includes various methodological and epistemological implications. The genre first appeared closely linked to the emergence of modern observing self, became critically self-conscious in the 20th century, increasingly engaged with the question of methodology. In doing so, interpreting Lukacs’s essay “On the Nature and Form of Essay”, indicates essay is a proper form of expression for lived experience and it is inherently an ironic form. For Lukacs, irony has the same relation to essay as doubting has to science. Afterward, by reading Adorno’s “Essay as Form”, this paper shows how he employs essay as a methodological tool to realize the negative dialectics thesis. Adorno formulates essay against the four rules that Descartes’s Discourse on Method sets up, contends that it proceeds methodically unmethodically. This method makes it a force field in which concepts come together in an open, dynamic network. So essay is a privileged form of philosophizing, allowing for the resistance to identifying, totalizing tendencies in a philosophical system. Therefore, both Lukacs’ and Adorno’s descriptions of essay are largely informed by their broader philosophical outlooks. Combining its epistemological and aesthetic aspects, they have also extended beyond the modern science-art dichotomy.

Employing a descriptive-analytical method, this article, first of all, deals with some of the criticisms on the methodology of “applied psychoanalysis”. Then, discussing Pierre Bayard’s idea of “applied literature” and, at the same time, referring to the 17th seminar of Jacques Lacan, The Other Side of Psychoanalysis, the paper points out that the terms “applied psychoanalysis” and “applied literature” seem to presuppose an external relationship between literature and psychoanalysis. On the contrary, Felman’s notion of “implication” is based on a simultaneously internal and external relationship between the two domains. In this way, the article highlights the weaknesses of Bayard’s idea and the stronger foundation of Felman’s arguments. Finally, in the context deliberately created for the conflict between these positions and points of view, the paper returns to some other aspects of Lacanian ideas such as the description of the term extimité and his subtle use of the English word “without”, asking whether it can be said that psychoanalysis is not “without” literature.

Aesthetics is thought to be one of the most basic spheres of philosophy traditionally, and most of the great philosophers study it and write about it. But some of them have transcended aesthetics beyond its usual borders and have made it the core of the philosophy. In their view aesthetics, experience or act is one of the aspects of human being-in-the-world. They see aesthetics as an ontology, and try to treat it and artworks as ontological issues. German romantics, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, are of the most important members of these philosophers. Works of Mikhail Bakhtin, Russian philosopher, and literary theorist, show that we can classify him among these philosophers. He has always been interested in aesthetic issues, both in his youth which he focused on existentialist issues, and in the later phase of his life which he focused on literary theory. In both of these phases, he also deals with ontological issues. He has almost always looked at ontological issues from an aesthetic point of view. Why? Is this a coincidence? If no, what are his reasons for this choice? Why does Bakhtin care so much about aesthetics? And how can he treat ontological issues aesthetically? In this article, we want to answer these questions. To reach this goal, we begin with his anthropology and show that in his view human lives in the world in a concrete condition. He explains this condition whit a physical term: 'chronotope', which means a matrix of place and time. Moreover, he used another important concept which borrowed from the law, 'non-alibi'. This concept in Bakhtins's thought means human does not have any cause or alibi for not-being-in-the-world. Bakhtin adds more features to them, one of these features is ‘eventness’ which means human never is ‘to-be’ rather always is ‘yet-to-be’ which means the human never finish before death. This is an annoying situation for humans. It is almost like the ‘Angst’ in Existentialist philosophies. His difference with them is that he examines this condition aesthetically. Moreover, for him or her person is very important. So he translates human concrete condition into author and hero relation. Other people can compose a hero and consummate him or her, but he can also, communicate to him or her and make him or her 'unfinished'. If another person consummate hero, he or she will get out of non-alibi status, which means he or she is not alive and real human anymore. If other people communicate with him or her, he or she will stay in non-alibi status, which is annoying for him or her. It is a conflict. Bakhtin try to solve it aesthetically. And in this article, we try to explain this try. To reach this goal, we use another Bakhtinian concept: Carnival. Bakhtin thinks medieval carnivals were some phenomena between life and art. Human in the carnival is never consummated but at the same time is free from any angst, because he has an alibi. In this article, we will show how Bakhtin can reach this conclusion.

Mikhail Bakhtin was a great Russian philosopher and literary critique in the 20th century. He was born in Oryol, Russian Empire and grew up in an orthodox culture, which remained with him until his death in 1975. He spent his life in USSR regime which exiled him for unknown reasons, maybe with religious believes. Bakhtin, like his fellows, studied philosophy, linguistics but unlike them, he showed little interest in sociology and politics, but we can find signs of attention to these fields in his works. Perhaps he hid these approaches in his work to avoid Stalinian censorship. He learned Germany in youth and was influenced by German 19th-century philosophy, specially Neo-Kantian philosophy and figures like Cohen. We know he is also was familiar with Bergson and philosophy of life. Similarly, he was interested in Greek culture and Medieval, specially Folklore and unofficial culture. In all of these fields, he explores aesthetics issues. We should understand him in a Kantian Context. Kant argued that the Judgment can bridge between two distinct part of human mind Pure reason and Practical reason. Bakhtin agreed with him but he thought Kant made aesthetics transcendental and abstract whereas it is fully concrete. In his view, the human is an unfinalizable creature who lives as an event that yet-to-be. He spent much time to explore literary kinds and find his ideal model in Dostoevsky's novels. Bakhtin believed Russian writer could present a good vision of human – hero- which do not neglect his or her Independence, freedom; and do not consummated him or her. Bakhtin, in a large part of his career, concerned with literary works and provided several notions which are useful for interpreting literary and artistic works. In this article, using some of these notions, we investigated Calling Saint Matthew, painted by Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, the Italian baroque painter. Caravaggio was an interesting figure in the history of art. He had several problems with the Catholic Church, Official culture and Painting tradition. In the last decades, academic communities rediscover him as a great master and study his work again. We argue that Caravaggio’s masterpieces are very fruitful for philosophical approaches especially Existentialist ones. Bakhtin's notions like an event, threshold moments, Unfinalizability and loophole are very useful for studying them. In this article, we employ these notions for studying one of the most famous and wonderful painting of him, The Calling St. Matthew. It was found that Bakhtin's notions for interpreting literary works are deductible from visual arts as well. Furthermore, it made clear that we can trace Bakhtinian ontological insights, especially anthropological trait ‘Unfinalizability', not only in Caravaggio's art but also in one of the most important saints of Christianity, Matthew's religious anecdote. So, from the dialogue between Bakhtins's thoughts, Caravaggio's art, and Cristian text, we deducted this Bakhtinian result that Unfinalizability is an Inherent human trait and just other people can find human's ‘loophole'. Besides, this result was deducted that Caravaggio's art can play the role of other and inter addressee into the Unfinalizability realm.

The present study investigates self-expression through profile image selection among Iranian female users in social networks (case study: Facebook) based on Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical theory. Goffman’s dramaturgical theory regards society as the stage of a theater and actors as players. If social networks can be perceived as a society in which users play their roles, then the selection of profile images can be regarded as the beginning of this process. Cyberspace allows users to have a selective “self” when dealing with others and express it in a variety of ways, including profile image selection. This paper follows visual culture studies that emphasize culture as an element influencing visual experience and vice versa. Such an attitude allows identifying cultural aspects which influence the selection of profile images by female users. The present study was conducted to analyze these images using 200 profile images. We also used qualitative content analysis and quantitative analyses to observe and classify the identified categories. Based on the results of the present study, women seem to tend to create and display an ideal self in their profile images. Such a selection is consistent with gender stereotypes and involves in the reproduction and enforcement of gender norms and performing them.

Roman Ingarden is a significant figure in phenomenological Aesthetics. Generally, his phenomenological studies are in the realm of Aesthetics. He believes that the work of art has a peculiar mode of being. Based on his viewpoint, the work of art is not a wholly determined and autonomous object, and its being depends upon the intentional acts of the creator and the reader. In fact, the work of art is “an intersubjective intentional object” of which the musical work is one of the best example. This article considers the relation of two fundamentally phenomenological terms: Schematization and Concretization. Based on these terms and step by step, we show that the work of art as an intentional object has schematic and incomplete structure and by its concretizations changes into aesthetic object. Work of art is not a closed cognitive structure manifested by the reader. It is an “open entity” the meaning of which arises from its concretizations. Thus, work of art is an eternally alive and novel entity.

This essay is going to show that the relationship between sublimity and morality in Kant’s precritical thinking doesn’t have a systematic philosophical form. The reason can be sought out in these two things: first, aesthetic feeling and moral feeling haven’t been distinguished clearly and have been defined in terms of each other. Second, morality is grounded in feeling, not pure practical reason and its a priori principle. In Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime, Kant invites human beings to ground moral principles on general affection. Although these principles are universal, they are not speculative rules and every human being should find them in his bosom. These are the feeling of beauty and dignity of human nature. In Remarks in the Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime, Kant’s thinking about morality changes in the way that can be regarded as the basis of his thought in critical period. However, he still believes that moral feeling is a kind of feeling of pleasure and displeasure to which we are not passive, but we are active because of possessing moral freedom.

GroundedThe present article deals with one of Kant’s most significant pre-Critical text, Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and the Sublime (1764), from the viewpoint of Kant’s methodology and conceptual means in dealing with the most important subjects of aesthetics in eighteenth-century, the beautiful and the sublime. Our main purpose is to demonstrate that albeit being inspired by his predecessors and contemporaries both in Britain and Germany in matters of taste (also our main presumption), Kant adopted a genuine approach in Observations. Through an in-depth analysis of the text we have endeavoured to show that the reasons for this originality are firstly, Kant’s specific observational, empirical method combined with his trying to find a universal principle for ethics, and secondly, Kant’s persistent concerns about ethics, anthropology and pedagogy presented by a taxonomic structure – issues present in the pre-Critical period and central to Kant’s philosophy all through the critical period. Our analysis is based on a close reading of the text, revealing its formal structure, leading to the conclusion that Observations is for the most part a taxonomically structured text on anthropology and ethics than aesthetics. Otherwise put, through aesthetics Kant is dealing with central issues in ethics and anthropology, i.e. highest principle of morality, the sexes, human temperaments and the ends of nature. We hope to succeeded in shedding a light on another aspect of the transcendental Kant: the empirical one

Visibility, as a key factor in Foucault’s analyses, had a major role in his thought. It is represented in three ways in his studies: as visual descriptions, as a principle in formation of knowledge, and as a technology of power. Although Foucault’s emphasis on visual descriptions made some scholars considering him as a visual philosopher, by contrast, his revealing of visibility-power relation, induced others to describe him as an opponent of ocularcentrism and believe that Foucault uses “vision” for “denigration of vision”. Thus, this article, by clarifying Foucault’s approach to “vision” and “visibility”, tries to represent a subtle image of visibility-power relation in his thought. In this article, we will discuss that, although the importance of visibility and vision is perceptible in Foucault’s very first works, but it’s in his genealogies which the relation power-visibility and its role in human subjectivation are highlighted. Power, on the one hand, make visibilities and, on the other hand, these visibilities make power analysis, power exercise, and even intervening in power, possible, in turn. Power, in royal as well as modern societies made profit of visibilities; by displaying its glory, hiding itself, and surveillance. Foucault, emphasizing on visibilities of different eras and its relation to power, tries to show us all the ways of visibility are not possible in any given era, and there are limitations in what we can see.

One of the key issues in the aesthetics of nature as a main branch of philosophical aesthetics is the “nature” of aesthetic experience, or rather appreciation, of nature. In this context, some models are suggested that made this appreciation subject to some conditions from descriptive or prescriptive point of views. In this paper, after an overview of the main suggested models, one of them, the art-centered or artwork-based model, is discussed, a model which makes appreciating aesthetic aspects of nature similar to appreciating arts, especially the visual arts and most notably painting. The question is to what extent this model can do justice to the aesthetic appreciation of nature qua nature. In response, it will be shown that at least for five important reasons, this model is not a sufficient one, and it can not capture all the characteristics of the aesthetic appreciation of nature. At the same time, referring to the exchanges between art and nature, it is argued that emphasizing on the inadequacy of the artcentered model does not mean that it is unable to enrich our aesthetic experience of nature in some important ways and to illuminate some of its dimensions without which it would remain dark.

As many have said, “ethical criticism of art” has been the most enduring topic in the philosophy of art; but, in this broad topic, we must distinguish two problems: the first is the possibility of ethical criticism of artworks, and the second is the relevance of such criticism to the aesthetic value of artworks. In other words, the first problem is whether we can reasonably engage in ethical criticism of artworks or not, whereas the second problem is whether the ethical criticism of an artwork relates to the aesthetic criticism of it. This essay, however, is just about the second problem. To deal with the problem, we firstly divided the arguments against ethical criticism of art into three divisions - ontological, epistemological, and methodological - and then, gathering the arguments for the possibility of such criticism, from radical moralism to moderate autonomism and even “immoralism”, we attempted to meet the opponents and show that it can be reasonable to criticize ethically.

This paper considers two questions regarding Kant’s theory of taste: first, considering the accompanying presence of subjective and intersubjective elements in Kant’s theory of taste, what relation does he establish between the subjective and intersubjective aspects of the judgment of taste? The first part of this paper addresses this question through the examination of logical characteristics of the judgment, and discusses that the judgment of taste, in Kant’s account, is an aesthetic judgment which on one hand, is made in total freedom and autonomy of the judging subject, and on the other hand, contains a special kind of universality in its content. Kant calls this special universality by the names of subjective universality, aesthetic universality, and general validity. Having illustrated this relation, the paper turns to the second question which asks: How does Kant manage to establish this relation between the subjective and intersubjective aspects of the judgment of taste? In this regard, it is argued in the second part that, although Kant believes in the subjectivity of the judgment of taste, he regards this subjectivity as a special kind, of which the intersubjectivity is the other side. This point is demonstrated by first clarifying the meaning of the specific subjectivity of the judgment of taste, and then by showing the intersubjective aspect of this subjectivity. Finally, it is suggested that on the basis of the intersubjective universality which is contained in the judgments of taste, Kant views the faculty of taste as a potential which enables empathy between the subjects and de-isolation of them.

The question of otherness is one of Bakhtin’s main concerns in his work، but the distinguished feature of his contribution to this subject is the inquiry into textual appearane of the Other. In this article، whilst the authors try to reassert Bakhtin’s philosophical view on the Other and his relation to self in the world، various dimensions of the appearance of the Other in texts are investigated. The main statement of the article is that while Bakhtin considers some texts to be dialogical and others to be monological، drawing on all his ideas on the subject، he believes that there exists a certain degree of conflict between dialogue and monologue within every text. In other words، neither the dialogical texts are devoid of any monological features، nor the monological texts are deprived of any dialogical features. Therefore، the domination of the dialogical or monological features over other extreme in the texts، determines a text to be generally dialogical or monological، and the absolute appearance of monological or dialogical features in a single text is proved to be of no credit.