Эстетика и культура: культурологическая интерпретация эстетических трансформаций в ХХ веке

N. A. Khrenov
{"title":"Эстетика и культура: культурологическая интерпретация эстетических трансформаций в ХХ веке","authors":"N. A. Khrenov","doi":"10.31312/2310-1245-2023-58-67-131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the shifts that unfolded from the turn of the XIX–XX centuries to the turn of the XX–XXI centuries in the humanities. The American researcher D. Bachmann-Medic recently made an expert in determining the most significant processes in this sense in her book \"Cultural Turns\". In accordance with her concept, at that stage in history when there was a cultural turn, linguistics took a decisive position in the humanities, in particular, in the sciences of art. It can be argued that for decades much in the humanities has been determined precisely by the linguistic turn. In general, that's what happened. This is evidenced by the appearance of formalism in its Russian and German forms at the beginning of the twentieth century, and then structuralism and poststructuralism. The semiotic turn, which aims to study existing sign systems, including art, illustrates the provisions of the book by D. Bachmann-Medic. The problem arose only with aesthetics, which, as linguistics increasingly asserted itself as a leading science, demonstrated a crisis and a decline in its high status. In general, we can agree with this characteristic of the development of the humanities. But the author of the article insists on the need for a culturological reading of scientific processes. Drawing attention to the fact that both signs and methods imitating signs take part in the communication processes (and such methods are, among others, symbols), the author of the article, referring to Hegel's idea that history is the history of the Spirit, shows that forms that arose take part in the communication processes in different periods of the history of the Spirit, including the most archaic forms, to which Hegel referred symbolic, and, in general, mythological forms. The ways of communication, determined not by signs themselves, but by ways imitating signs, and these are symbols, are at the heart of not only sign systems, but also types of culture. Asserting this, the author relies on the idea of representing the poststructuralism of Yu. Kristeva, who distinguishes iconic and unfamiliar types of cultures in history. Based on this idea, the author shows that at the turn of the XX–XXI centuries, humanity is entering an era of radical cultural renewal, which has consequences for the humanities. This epoch is characterized by an exit from a culture functioning on the basis of a sign and an appeal to symbolic forms of thinking, which corresponds to P. Sorokin's concept of sociodynamics of culture, in which types of cultures are distinguished. At the turn of the XX–XXI centuries, a culture based on sensory reality and guided by the cognition of this reality by positivist methods is experiencing a decline, which explains the decline in the status of classical aesthetics. In this context, it becomes clear the final stage in the functioning of the humanities, at which a linguistic turn was possible. This is explained by the next extinction of positivism. Such its extinction will occur in an alternative culture, which activates forms of symbolic thinking. In this atmosphere there will be a revival of aesthetics as a science, in which the forms preceding the emergence of classical aesthetics will be actualized.","PeriodicalId":474109,"journal":{"name":"Studia Culturae","volume":" 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Culturae","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31312/2310-1245-2023-58-67-131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article is devoted to the shifts that unfolded from the turn of the XIX–XX centuries to the turn of the XX–XXI centuries in the humanities. The American researcher D. Bachmann-Medic recently made an expert in determining the most significant processes in this sense in her book "Cultural Turns". In accordance with her concept, at that stage in history when there was a cultural turn, linguistics took a decisive position in the humanities, in particular, in the sciences of art. It can be argued that for decades much in the humanities has been determined precisely by the linguistic turn. In general, that's what happened. This is evidenced by the appearance of formalism in its Russian and German forms at the beginning of the twentieth century, and then structuralism and poststructuralism. The semiotic turn, which aims to study existing sign systems, including art, illustrates the provisions of the book by D. Bachmann-Medic. The problem arose only with aesthetics, which, as linguistics increasingly asserted itself as a leading science, demonstrated a crisis and a decline in its high status. In general, we can agree with this characteristic of the development of the humanities. But the author of the article insists on the need for a culturological reading of scientific processes. Drawing attention to the fact that both signs and methods imitating signs take part in the communication processes (and such methods are, among others, symbols), the author of the article, referring to Hegel's idea that history is the history of the Spirit, shows that forms that arose take part in the communication processes in different periods of the history of the Spirit, including the most archaic forms, to which Hegel referred symbolic, and, in general, mythological forms. The ways of communication, determined not by signs themselves, but by ways imitating signs, and these are symbols, are at the heart of not only sign systems, but also types of culture. Asserting this, the author relies on the idea of representing the poststructuralism of Yu. Kristeva, who distinguishes iconic and unfamiliar types of cultures in history. Based on this idea, the author shows that at the turn of the XX–XXI centuries, humanity is entering an era of radical cultural renewal, which has consequences for the humanities. This epoch is characterized by an exit from a culture functioning on the basis of a sign and an appeal to symbolic forms of thinking, which corresponds to P. Sorokin's concept of sociodynamics of culture, in which types of cultures are distinguished. At the turn of the XX–XXI centuries, a culture based on sensory reality and guided by the cognition of this reality by positivist methods is experiencing a decline, which explains the decline in the status of classical aesthetics. In this context, it becomes clear the final stage in the functioning of the humanities, at which a linguistic turn was possible. This is explained by the next extinction of positivism. Such its extinction will occur in an alternative culture, which activates forms of symbolic thinking. In this atmosphere there will be a revival of aesthetics as a science, in which the forms preceding the emergence of classical aesthetics will be actualized.
美学与文化:二十世纪美学变革的文化解读
这篇文章专门论述了从十九至二十世纪之交到二十至二十一世纪之交人文学科的转变。美国研究员 D. 巴赫曼-梅迪克(D. Bachmann-Medic)最近在她的著作《文化转向》(Cultural Turns)中确定了这一意义上最重要的进程。根据她的概念,在文化转向的历史阶段,语言学在人文学科,特别是艺术科学中占据了决定性的地位。可以说,几十年来,人文学科中的很多东西正是由语言学转向决定的。总体而言,情况就是如此。二十世纪初出现的俄语和德语形式的形式主义,以及随后出现的结构主义和后结构主义都证明了这一点。巴赫曼-梅迪克(D. Bachmann-Medic)在书中指出,符号学转向旨在研究包括艺术在内的现有符号系统。问题只出现在美学上,随着语言学日益宣称自己是一门主要科学,美学出现了危机,其崇高地位也随之下降。总的来说,我们同意人文学科发展的这一特点。但文章作者坚持认为,有必要对科学进程进行文化学解读。文章作者提请我们注意,符号和模仿符号的方法都参与了交流过程(这些方法除其他外就是符号),他提到了黑格尔关于历史是精神史的观点,指出在精神史的不同时期,出现的形式都参与了交流过程,包括黑格尔所指的最古老的符号形式,以及一般而言的神话形式。交流的方式不是由符号本身决定的,而是由模仿符号的方式决定的,这些方式就是符号,它们不仅是符号系统的核心,也是文化类型的核心。为了证明这一点,作者采用了于.克里斯蒂娃区分了历史上标志性和陌生的文化类型。基于这一观点,作者指出,在二十至二十一世纪之交,人类进入了一个激进的文化复兴时代,这对人文学科产生了影响。这个时代的特点是,文化退出了以符号为基础的运作方式,转而诉诸象征性的思维形式,这与索罗金(P. Sorokin)的 "文化社会动力学"(sociodynamics of culture)概念相吻合,在这个概念中,文化的类型被区分开来。在二十至二十一世纪之交,以感官现实为基础、以实证主义方法认知现实为指导的文化正在经历衰落,这也是古典美学地位下降的原因。在此背景下,人文学科运作的最后阶段变得清晰起来,在这一阶段,语言学转向成为可能。这可以用实证主义的下一次消亡来解释。实证主义的消亡将发生在另一种文化中,这种文化激活了符号思维的形式。在这种氛围下,美学作为一门科学将会复兴,古典美学出现之前的形式将在其中得以实现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书