Use this url to cite publication: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/42155
Options
Nereferuojanti meninė kritika : nuo kontrpropagandos iki fantazijos kūno
Type of publication
Straipsnis kitame recenzuojamame leidinyje / Article in other peer-reviewed edition (S5)
Author(s)
Šiaulių universitetas |
Title
Nereferuojanti meninė kritika : nuo kontrpropagandos iki fantazijos kūno
Other Title
Art Criticism Without Abstracting: From Counterpropaganda to the Body of Fantasy
Is part of
Inter-studia humanitatis. Šiauliai : Šiaulių universiteto leidykla, 2005, nr. 2 : Meno pasaulis: uždaras sociumas ar neribotos galmybės?
Date Issued
Date Issued |
---|
2005 |
Publisher
Šiauliai : Šiaulių universiteto leidykla
Extent
p. 98-123
Field of Science
Abstract
Two topics are discussed in the article: first, relation between corporeal experience of artistic criticism and artistic counterpropaganda, second, influence of artistic criticism to the building of personal body of fantasy. Artistic propaganda and counterpropaganda as forms of art could be manipulative and spontaneous, but in both cases the art of counterpropaganda is an ideological one. An ideological element could be formulated rationally and irrationally. In any way, artistic criticism influences subconscious of people almost always. An ideological element of artistic counterpropaganda (as a case of artistic criticism) exists as a work of art and could be interpreted in M. Heidegger’s manner. It means that an ideological art of work and the art of counterpropaganda could be interpreted by the same notions, metaphors and paradigms of Heidegger as a common artistic work (for example, painting, sculpture or architecture). In the case of ideological spontaneous works publicity and openness of an artistic work become quite paradoxical and show not only the truth of a human being but realize different manipulative ideas and simulacrus without any signifying of reality. The article of Vl. Lenin “Tolstoy as a Mirror of Russian Revolution” is considered here. Lenin sees artistic criticism in the works of Tolstoy as a beautiful mimesis of a Russian village’s consciousness in the period of 1905–1907 revolution. The idea that a art of work is not a simple mirror or mimesis but is a participant of an event is maintained in the paper. The symbolical world is constantly being changed and the same content of a work of art, for example, writings of Tolstoy, all the time is variated and depends on a different impact of historical (social, cultural) events or the reader’s capacity to interpret the work of art. Propaganda in the issues of itself coincided with the shine in M. Heidegger’s sense. [...].
Type of document
type::text::journal::journal article::research article
Language
Lietuvių / Lithuanian (lt)
Coverage Spatial
Lietuva / Lithuania (LT)