Document Type : Original/Research/Regular Article
Authors
1
Department of Handicrafts and Art Research, Faculty of Art and Architecture, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Handicrafts and Art Research, Faculty of Art and Architecture, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
Abstract
In general terms, phenomena associated with the Humanities expand and advance in two ways. Based on the first model, a phenomenon may expand and advance from within; and, based on the second model, a phenomenon may do so in accordance with, and proportional to, society and ideology. In other words, the first model helps make such matters more precise and profound, whereas the second model expands them, thus increasing their function. Using new theories about Art, moreover, the ability is bestowed upon the artist to think more deeply even about the artwork of the present day and age. Absence of this approach – as well as lack thereof – is oftentimes felt in Art-oriented research in Iran; and, the absence of new theories had led to a lack of interest in the relationship between artwork and today's society. In this article, an attempt has been made to open a different cognitive window in the world of Art by which to conduct a comparison of artworks through describing the new approaches and their implementation models as well as predicting the path upon which these ideas are to, and can, embark.
Comparative Studies is one of the most widely used and essential methods of examining works of Art; it has a great history and has always proceeded in a progressive and forward-looking manner. Various reviews and opinions have been presented about the origins of Comparative Studies. The majority of sources consider the history of comparative Art research to be connected to the history of Comparative Literature which originated in Middle Ages. Additionally, they consider political developments to have been the leading factor in the formation of national literature in Europe, thus resulting in its theoretical form and formation in the early 18th century. Throughout the course of time up until the 18th century, Comparative Studies between different media had occurred independently and without having a separate name and identity. Until then, the researchers always, and only, compared works of Art and Literature in one or two various media. Today, this method of study is used widely in Comparative Literature, having many functions in recognizing and criticizing works of Art, Literature, and the social context of their production. A new branch of Comparative Studies called “Interart Studies” presents a new cognitive approach that considers the quiddity of interaction between singular art media and focuses on identifying and expressing different borders of art media. In the present article, by describing this approach and its implementation models, a different cognitive window has been opened in the world of Art for the adaptation of artworks; and, the paths that these theories have in front of them have been accordingly predicted.
Comparative Studies entered Iran's academic environment rather belatedly. The term "Comparative Literature" entered the very lexicon of Iranian research literature for the first time through a translation of a thirty-eight-page-long excerpt from the book Comparative Literature by Marius Francois Guyard, an effort made by Jamshid Behnam. Afterwards, Fatemeh Sayah – a student of European Literature from Moscow – founded the chair of Comparative Literature in Tehran University's Faculty of Literature for the first time in Iran after which research and discussion about this cognitive method and its use did indeed spread. The review of the keyword "Comparative Studies" – and the derivatives thereof – in the materials published by Iranian publications, and/or as Iranian theses, delineates the fact that most of the studies have been conducted in the fields of Education, Linguistics, Literature, and – in recent years, increasingly so – Art as well as subject matters of the world of Art. This article evaluates the evolution of early Comparative Studies from its original conception in the 18th century to its current inception and situation known as Intermediality and Interart Studies both which have been mentioned above. New studies have pushed "comparison" beyond the adaptation between two similar media so as to achieve a complete understanding and knowledge of Art. They gradually provided a better understanding of the boundaries between art media to finally – by approaching the endmost cognitive boundaries of the nature of "Art", which is considered indefinable – distinguish it from "Non-art". These theories open the path towards a connection between, and a joint study of, life and Art.
The present piece has used an analytical and comparative approach towards the history of Comparative Studies in order to understand the undertaken theoretical methods for expansion in this cognitive field by the virtue of which to reach a new attitude towards artistic media. The current research aims to recognize and explain the developments and achievements of the aforementioned new approach to Comparative Studies so as to open new paths and pathways for research and creation in Art. The importance of conducting this research results from the fact that – although this new method of Comparative Studies has been used in other parts of the world in a limited manner due to its complexity – it has not yet been used in a theorized and self-aware form in Iran. The authors have tried to answer the following question. How did the field of Comparative Studies expand along its evolutionary path towards artistic and social developments which have per se created new forms to deal with the recent manifestations of the notion of art media? In the current study, the research hypothesis is thus twofold, proceeding based upon considering a correlation between the evolution of Comparative Studies and the issues, media, and new works of Art affected by the changes in society on the one hand and the existence of sufficient evidence for knowing the cycle of this evolution on the other hand. In the investigations carried out in this article, it has been tried to focus on those developments of Comparative Studies which are aligned with artistic expansions in order to obtain a reliable and documented scientific value. Accordingly, to study the relationship between the evolution of the history of thought and artistic changes, the authors have tried to distance themselves from mere historical research and move towards analytical research with defendable and defensible findings that lead them to reach the final theory, that is, to cross the borders of art media. Ergo, the current research is an analytical and historical study wherein the necessary information has been achieved using library sources and resources.
Under the influence of classical Comparative Studies and by inspecting and comparing artworks between different media, the findings of the present research do show that this new intertheoretical branch has reached a point whereby it has developed a tendency towards dissipating the borders between artistic media, eventually defining all of them to be mere works of art. Accordingly, along the path of comparison between Art and Non-art, certain propositions are obtained to define the nature of Art concerning experimental and experiential means and methods. Interart Studies, or Interart Aesthetics, should not be considered a new and separate discipline. This type of research is an inter- and multi-disciplinary field of study and can only be concluded when one can study other cultural and social disciplines amid this framework. This field of research requires crossing traditional boundaries and linking different disciplines to achieve expansion. Not only is comparison a practical method for interdisciplinary studies, but it can also be considered the only available method for cognition; after all, it is the point of discovering differences of/or different arts. That is why Comparative Studies succeeded in its departure from comparing various works of art and towards today's position as a means for proceeding with interdisciplinary study methods, maintaining its function as one of the essential methods of study.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)