Kraštovaizdžio architektūros ir daiktinės aplinkos dizaino šiuolaikinė menotyrinės raidos tendencija

Abstract

Straipsnyje aptariama ikonologinio-interpretacinio (ekspertinio) menotyrinio metodo kaip „vidinių esmių“ idėja. Bandymai apčiuopti nūdienos meninio tyrimo raidos kryptis, kaip kultūriškai nulemtas menų sąveikines būsenas, tarsi už meno kūrinio vaizdo slypinčias „vidines esmes“, pasitelkiamos XX a. pirmos pusės menotyrininkų, kultūrologų A. Warburg, E. Panofsky, W. J. Th. Mitchell, H. Belting, taip pat PostMo Vakarų tyrėjų R. Wittkower, E. Gombrich, J. Białostocki, S. Alpers ir kt. veikaluose išdėstytos teorijos. Apibendrinančioje dalyje, remiantis autoriaus daugiamečiais stebėjimų rezultatais dalyvau jant meno kūrinių vertinimo procesuose tiek nacionaliniame1 , tiek tarptautiniame2 lygiuose, taip pat bandoma atsakyti į iškeltos hipotezės teiginį, kad ikonologija, kaip interpretacinis menotyrinis ikono grafinio ir ikonologinio metodų vienis, gali būti taikomas ne tik istoriniams dailės kūriniams analizuoti, bet ir šiuolaikinio PostMo taikomojo meno esmėms dekoduoti, yra teisingas. Konstruojama mintis, kad tai yra tyrimų įrankis, padedantis ne tik perprasti taikomojo meno objekto pamatines (funkcines bei estetines) struktūras jas dekonstruojant, bet ir įgalinti suformuoti naujai kuriamus, sąveikoje su lokalia sociokultūrine bei laikmečio tradicija, kūrinius. Remiantis daugelio tyrėjų menotyrine patirtimi, ikono grafinio ir ikonologinio-interpretacinio (ekspertinio) menotyrinių metodų vienio idėja, kaip „vidinės esmės“ tyrimo priemonė, yra itin tinkama nūdienos taikomojo meno objektų menotyrinei praktika.

The issue of art evaluation from a methodological perspective is discussed globally in various aspects of artistic and scientific knowledge. The problem of subjectivity in the interpretation-based (expert) evaluation of artworks is raised, questioning the reliability of criteria values. Answers are sought to questions: to what extent different expert interpretations and perspectives on the identity of the same artwork are related to the final value of the artwork in the public discourse? It is also asked whether the result of interpretive expert evaluation, being adequate to the socially understood meaning of the artwork, is correct? The aim of the article is to discuss the peculiarities of the interpretive (expert) artistic research method and the problem of artwork evaluation in the field of applied arts (landscape architecture, architecture, urbanistic spatial design). This is considered within the practice of postmodernity (PostMo) in a specific geographical location and in the socio-cultural context of a specific historical period. The article discusses interpretations of aesthetic quality in landscape architecture and spatial design, based on studies by Western cultural theorists and Lithuanian scholars, characteristic of early 19th century forms of modernism in connection with practical contemporary works of landscape architecture in Lithuania. Developing utilitarian ideas, the importance of the iconological method of interpretive (expert) analysis of artworks as interpretations of "inner essences" is emphasized. The thematic direction of interpretive evaluation was prompted by the feasibility of implementing the program "Creation of Evaluation Systems for Landscape Architecture Projects and Objects" funded by the Lithuanian Culture Council within the Lithuanian Association of Landscape Architects in 2022. Therefore, the article mainly focuses on discussing iconology as an interpretive method for analyzing artworks in theoretical contexts, aiming to draw attention to contemporary trends in postmodern socio-cultural development. In the concluding part, the hypothesis is addressed that iconology as an art research method can be applied not only to analyze historical works of art but also to interpret the "inner essences" of contemporary Post Mo art as well as applied landscape architecture (LA) and the material environment spatial design (MED) objects. This is grounded on the fact that through the historical comparative interpretation of artistic symbols, the foundational structures of aesthetic forms of LA and its MED objects are fundamentally understood, and they are newly created in interaction with the local socio-cultural tradition. The article concludes with a discussion of common issues, establishes directions for ongoing dialogue and practice between the fields of iconography and iconology. The article draws on a review of iconography and iconology literature, as well as our own research and practical experience.