جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "تصویر هنری" در نشریات گروه "هنر و معماری"

This research studying the phenomenology of artistic image in the contemporary painting according to Gaston Bachelard's theory of poetic imagewhich is combines and identifies between the material and thought, consciousness and subconscious, assuming the existence of a correlation between the artistic and aesthetic production of contemporary painting and Bachelard's phenomenological poetic image. It aims to detect the phenomenology of artistic image in the contemporary painting and its dimensions in terms of: its creativity, its existence, and its sublimation. So that, and in order to achieve its goal, the research came on three sections: the first one dealt with the creativity of artistic image as a combination between objectivity and subjectivity and the resulting cooperation between realistic and unrealistic and with the help of their functions, while the second one took up its existence by considering itan intense moment of consciousnessand an attempt to direct Anthology, and the third one interested by studying its cosmic considering it phenomenology of spirit because it is both spirit and mind, material and thought, expression and form. The research found a set of 1-The artistic image generates as a result of the exchange of jobs between the matter and thinking; it is a combination between the objectivity and subjectivity (communication and estrangement); ie: phenomenological, and the artistic image in contemporary painting is an installation and similarity between the expression and meaning. 2-The artistic image is a phenomenon of isolation that carries the imagination. It must be imagined to know it; the imagined consciousness, which opens up to an isolated self-image, is a primal consciousness open to innumerable experiences; therefore, the artistic image is original. 3-The artistic image in the contemporary painting is a moment of intense consciousness; it is an attempt to direct anthology; because it is independent of causality. The relationship between the new artistic image and archetype in the depths of the unconsciousness is not causality; that is, it is not a simple alternative toa certain reality, which is not a symbol; as it turns out, the symbolism confirms; because it has history. 4-Art is not subject to the control of thought, it is a phenomenon of freedom belonging to the self, to the interrupted time of the matter (moment), not to the time of continuous thought (permanence), and tampering is the source of this freedom.5-The artistic image in contemporary painting is a synthesis between the soul and the mind; it is an idea when it acquires a cosmic value, and this cosmic image belongs to the isolated and solitary soul. It is a reality and phenomenon; therefore, we are accompanied by its phenomenology (its cosmic and its materialistic) towards an ethereal world, a spiritual world away from objective reality. 6-The contemporary painting is a phenomenology of the Spirit rather than a phenomenology of mind; because the unconsciousness is the origin of consciousness; this unconsciousness that precedes the consciousness has phenomenology nature; ie: the material of artwork is both material and formal cause at the same time (expression and shape).

Imagination theory (imagination syntax) tries to display a method by which readers can find the structure and the syntax of a work of art; they can as well have a scientific reading of that work. It is, however, possible that these theories and readings, which practically enjoy structuralist methods, to be regarded as paradoxical. But the writer believes that imagination likewise follows the imagination rules and also the rules dominating various imagination creations. Believing in these rules does not lead to the denial of the individual freedom, but it is solely an examination of the circumstances in which imagination is taken into play in order to have a better understanding of its main features and inherent meanings. The numerous studiies in those fields have obviously prevented any claim to a critical consensus. The writer of this article has limited himself to the methodology proposed and practiced by Jean Burgos. This methodology elucidates a constant process which starts from collective imagination and ends up with subjective imagination. In other words, if we draw a line and put Jung’s and Lacan’s theories, which are about subjective imagination, at the two ends, Burgos stands somewhere in the middle. Hence we put our questions forward and search for the answers. Why does this or that image occur to the mind? What does it signify? And what other images does it include as a texture? Which imagination syntax does it display? And how can we learn the grammars underlying the imagination creations?