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

Our understanding of contemporary architecture and its relation to the past has formed historically against the backdrop of a complex network of various individuals and other contextual factors. A prominent figure representative of such an understanding is Vartan Hovanessian. His decades-long activities included diverse fields such as criticism and authorship, corporate activity, and architectural design. This article answers the question of his intellectual position regarding the relationship between the architecture of his time and that of the past. It examines the network of thoughts, individuals, events, interactions, and other factors to draw a comprehensive picture that goes beyond a scholarly monograph of the architect. The research mainly relies on primary sources especially his articles, using the historical method to construct a narrative of his intellectual positions on the relation of past and present architecture during the three decades of his professional activity in Iran. This research shows that “the past” appears in Hovanessian’s thinking in two distinct ways: the “distant past” and the “recent past”. The “distant past” in all of his writings includes all historical periods of Iranian architecture up to its peak, i.e., the Safavid era, while the “recent past” starts a few decades before the publication of his first articles. However, the works and the time frame he suggests for the architecture of the “recent past” vary in the articles he published during the 1320s and 1340s SH. His different intellectual positions towards the past in each period can be explained in relation to modern architecture and to his perspective of the future as manifested in the European and Western ideals of modernism.

Since 1970s during which the psychoanalytical film criticism inspired a vast range of writings in various disciplines(Cinema studies, anthropology, philosophy and so on) the most popular approach was predicated upon the analogy between the Lacanian concept of specular image and the cinema image according to which the film analysts though of cinema screen as the Lacanian mirror. According to this approach-an gradually a model for studying film in a psychoanalytic manner- that was offered by Jean Louis Baudry, Reymond Bellour, Chrstian Metz, Peter Wollen and Laura Mulvey, the cinema spectator is compared to the infant who (mis)recognizes her/himself in her/his mirror reflection and identifies with it. The correspondence between the mirror image of self and the cinematic image provided theoretical grounds for some major psychoanalytical trends such as “the screen as the mirror” and “the Suture theory”. A number of post-modern thinkers, namely Slavoj Zizek revised the Suture theory and in doing so, they rediscovered and reapplied some Lacanian concepts and integrated them in the model. Their main goal were to- through the split which is believed to exist between the imaginary and the symbolic order exemplified in the split existing between the unconscious and the conscious identity represented in a mirror image of self- show the split between the interior and the exterior of the artificial identities that The other bestows upon its subjects. For some, this split that could be concluded from a cinematic experience shows that the Ideological Apparatus (Cinema discourse) fails to produce unifies subjects. The split, as a form of resistance as a happy yet bleeding wound remains forms a lack and leaves s stain on the cinematic image as well as it represents the impotency of the cinematic apparatus for making unified subjects out of its spectators. Such a split or lack was denied by some, like Gilis DeLeuze who posited themselves against Lacan and Lacanian approach to film, yet it seems that the analogy set between Lacan’s mirror and cinematic image has not drawn on a precise assumption of Lacan’s psychoanalysis. Sutue theory, with theorists such as Pier Odart and Zizek relyed on such analogy to try to analyze and explain the ways through which the split between the interior-exterior realm of the cultural-visual objects and the interior truth of the artificiality is sutured through the mediations of the desire of the audience and meanwhile reveals it. In this essay and through a comparative analysis across the Lacan’s texts and the remodeling of suture theory, the very basic presumptions on which the theory is based would be interrogated: Is the cinematic screen could be considered as a Lacanian mirror? To begin with, in the essay would be reviewed the ways through which a mirror image is constructed in the gaze of the viewer, then the nature cinematic image would be analyzed and subsequently the comparison between the mirror and cinematic image with regards to their relations to their viewer would follow and Under the new light the analogy would be observed and revised.

The number of women in Tehran urban spaces has increased and the quality of their presence differs from the past. Tehran Bazaar attracts hundreds of thousands of people every day while a remarkable percentage of this population are women. The bazaar environment in recent years has encountered an increase in the number of women's presence. The research problem is that so far, women’s experience of Tehran Bazaar as an Iranian shopping space, has not been recognized. While women are using this space that has been gradually formed over the years for men who had been in the majority. The research purpose is to find out the meaning of the Bazaar and how the spatial qualities affect the formation of this meaning in the minds of Bazaar’s female users. Using a phenomenological approach, researchers have conducted in-depth interviews with 14 women (and to achieve complementary data, 6 men). The maps derived from the mental images of women and men show that the realm of presence of men in the bazaar is more extensive than the realm of presence of women. In the mentality of participating women, Tehran Bazaar finds its meaning in the form of five main themes as follows: shopping space, recreation space, layered space, gendered space, and intimate space. These meanings are affected by seven themes that describe the spatial qualities of the bazaar: a large complex of specialized “Raste Bazaars” (or Bazaar branches), being historical, being a labyrinth, being movement based, being old and traditional, liveliness and social diversity. The research findings show Tehran Bazaar is not only a place to shop, but presents some important benefits of urban space such as being among the people, enjoying the physical qualities and being linked with historical identity of the city. Researchers' interpretations also suggest that there is a disjuncture and inconsistency between the women experiences and the pre-existing male structures. This disjuncture results from the lack of conformity between the socio-cultural characteristics and the spatial qualities of the environment with the needs and desires of women in the "lived space". In spite of these inconsistencies, some factors act in favor of women presence in Tehran Bazaar. The meaning of the Bazaar as a "recreation space", which makes good feelings for most of its visitors, and the "intimate space" that is welcoming to people from every culture and class, suggests that, despite all the restrictions and shortcomings, women have been able to benefit from the Bazaar characteristics in favor of their own interests. Being a place for shopping, Tehran Bazaar has the potential to enable women to disguise themselves as buyers and at the same time enjoy the spatial and social qualities beyond a shopping environment. The results of this study point out that for any possible modification in the Bazaar, the meanings of this place in the experience of its users should be carefully recognized. Designs that do not care about these meanings can lead to the destruction of values of the Bazaar for its audience.

The “neo-traditionalist” discourse has appeared following the general strategies of the power structure and the mindset of the intellectuals in contemporary Iranian art. Intellectuals mental support of the creation of an anti-west-toxification (a derogatory term used for westernization) discourse and returning to former ways, and also the support of power structure for creation of a neo-traditionalist discourse, directs the artists to a path of differentiating the modernist Iranian art from the western modern art. In such a circumstance, it is obvious that artists would accept their position in the predominant discourse, and legitimize themselves by it.
Analyzing the relationship between the level of artists’ (neo-traditionalist) discourse and the levels of other intellectual and institutional discourses in the contemporary Iranian art and critiquing the influence of these levels on each other are the objectives of this study.
The research method is analyticaldescriptive- historical and the data is collected through documentary research method. The overall approach and theoretical framework is based on some of the concept in of Michel Foucault’s historicism, the French philosopher of the twentieth century

Some of the experts in the two fields of cultural domain and Iranian society, believe in “historical experience accumulation”, which is the outcome of historical cohesive idea; on the other hand, some experts believe that compared to historical experience accumulation, we are facing “historical rupture” and the repetition of past experiences; our “temporary society” concept, comes from this school of thought which is a consequence of studying and observing Iranian culture, character and attributes through the course of history. According to temporary society concept, society has faced essential changes during two brief periods and as a result its history has changed into short period strings, attached to each other. Unfinished searches to find architectural space and a safe haven and some other, different city has filled Iranian history with fear and hope. Iranians have always had ideals for themselves in the course of civil evolution and were in pursuit of making spaces and housings with bright futures, but the real crisis started at the time when news came in from other parts of the world expressing that there had been occurrences on the other side of the planet that had resulted in a better city and life for people, and specially in contemporary era, the society started dreaming and fantasizingabout those ideals. In Pahlavi era, this fact combined with the appeal of urbanization and emigration, directed the society toward civilization crisis and failure of dreams.What Pahlavi government did to reform the society economically and socially, had some direct effects on structure and skeleton of urban and rural architecture; but its deepest and most noticeable effect was the change it initiated in Iranians perspective toward the dream they had about their past. Iranian addressee’s dreaming had trapped him in the conflict between his internal and external life, and his desired being unfulfilled in the surrounding world, caused a passive rupture to emerge which has caused the internal crisis in contemporary Iranian people.In a situation like this, “architecture”, which, after “language”(or as a demonstrative language) is considered to be the most important symbol of culture and “vessel of life”; has been the subject to change and crisis due to cultural crisis. A kind of excitement, uncertaintyand multiplicity is clear when looking at creations of architects and the class and position of architecture has been given to construction and installation. There are as many views, criterions, tastes and demands for construction as there are people in the society and this makes “being different” to be the most cardinal aspect of the contemporary architecture. The realm of architecture and the scenery of contemporary Iranian cities, especially those like Tehran, are filled with fascinating developing designs which are different from the past and different with eachother. The dominance of contemporary thought school combined with attributes of idealism and development, is a fixed issue, taking a new form every day and while seeming to end, it will reborn in a new form.In the new constructive perspective, architecture is regarded as a form of “commodity” and not a “place to live”, city as a “commodity warehouse” and not “civil ground”; as a result, Iranian architecture is becoming more of a “simple architecture”.Although, rays of hope have always been visible in a temporarily manner in Iranian architecture, character and behavior of Iranian people, extreme mental uncertainty and unpredictability of the future, have never allowed them a long term perception of life, or a long term dream for architecture and city (as the structural place of residing); but they have given an unreliable identity to the optimum quality of contemporary architecture. In a short term perspective, architecture does not mature enough and does not take a solid form, and is ready to produce a newer form.The main source of the present disordered condition of Iranian architecture is the dominant confusion on mental state and dreams of Iranian society and lack of cultural awareness and also the ruptures and cultural degradation (cultural confusion) in the Iranian society. A society in which being “short term” is its most obvious feature and the speed, volume and process of transformations in it, have had a deepening and intensifying effect on its changes and on enduring and unfinished dreaming of society; in a way that when we consider the contemporary era, we see a clear recessionary effect.

In cultural semiotics as posed by Tartu-Moscow circle the concepts of cultural sphere, border, and the (non)cultural other and the dialogue between this cultural self and that other on the borders are very critical. The mechanism of intercultural translation and the processes of inclusion and exclusion govern this intercultural dialogue. Such communication between cultures, in order to be realized, should be based on some similarities and differences. The presumed borders are not definite separating lines; rather there are some overlapping areas between two cultures. These are the areas which create continuity on the continuum of cultures. At the same time since the cultures want to create cultural identity through differences, gradually moving back from these margins towards the center (of culture), they experience a discontinuity. This dialectic of continuity and discontinuity generates the propelling energy and dynamicity of culture. In cultural semiotics, culture is not a self-contained, autonomous sphere, rather it is synchronically and diachronically a dynamic process of intercultural, inter-textual and intersemiotic relations, unstable, always in change and dynamic. Theater, in its contemporary sense, is a sub-sphere of culture developed through such intercultural translation and processes of inclusion and exclusion. This study tries to study the Iranian contemporary theater in the light of a cultural semiotic theory. We want to see how modern western theater found its way to Iranian cultural sphere, and was gradually appropriated, and found its local features. The collected data are classified thematically and then analyzed and finally we will have a case study which is the drama “Zaman Khan’s Rule” written by Mirza Agha Tabrizi who is known as the first Iranian playwright. The important figures studied in this article are Mirza Fathali Akhundzadeh and Mirza Agha Tabrizi which had a critical role in intruding theater to Iranian culture. These two people were contemporary to each other but because of living in different cultural contexts had different approaches to theater. In fact it was Mirza Fathali Akhundzadeh who was the source of inspiration for Mirza Agha Tabrizi and the interesting point is that Akhundzadeh himself lived in Tbilisi who was in fact a border and threshold between Iranian cultural sphere and western culture. As a matter of fact, Tbilisi’s theater was itself a result of intercultural relations with west. Thus Akhunzadeh himself, living for a long time in Tbilisi, looked at western theater as something belonging to a cultural other. Therefore Mirza Agha Tabrizi was experiencing a double intercultural translation. In this article we have tried to show the complicated double mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion and its effects on Iranian theater. It is evident that in this article we do not consider culture and as a result theater a product but a complex, multifaceted process, Theater entering Iran began a dialogue with local traditional plays and modern Iranian theater, like any other cultural process, is the result of such dialogues, between local forms and those coming from the other. Indeed this is in pace with all other aspects of our contemporary life.