"Аудіовізуальне мистецтво" як концепт у сучасному мистецтвознавчому дискурсі

Abstract

У статті проведено концептуальний аналіз “аудіовізуального мистецтва” в сучасному мистецтвознавчому дискурсі, розглянуто специфіку його денотативного поля та визначні типологізації у нинішньому пострадянському і західному суспільствах. Досліджено синтаксичну специфіку й контекстуально обумовлену семантику концепту “аудіовізуальне мистецтво” в сучасному мистецтвознавчому просторі. Визначено співвідношення досліджуваного концепту з усталеними формулюваннями, такими як “екранне мистецтво”, “екранна культура”, а також новітнім – “аудіовізуальна культура”. Розглянуто специфіку взаємодії концептів “Digital Art”, “visual art” та “audiovisual art”.

В статье проведен концептуальный анализ “аудиовизуального искусства” в современном искусствоведческом дискурсе, рассмотрена специфика его денотативного поля и определяющих типологизаций в современном постсоветском и западном обществах. Исследованы синтаксическая специфика и контекстуально обусловленная семантика концепта “аудиовизуальное искусство” в современном искусствоведческом пространстве. Определено соотношение исследуемого концепта с общепринятыми в современном искусствоведческом дискурсе формулировками, такими как “экранное искусство”, “экранная культура”, а также новейшим – “аудиовизуальная культура”. Рассмотрена специфика взаимодействия концептов “Digital Art”, “visual art” и “audiovisual art”.

A conceptual analysis of “audiovisual art” in the contemporary art criticism discourse is provided, the specificity of the denotative field and main typologies of the “audiovisual art” in the contemporary post-Soviet and Western discourse are considered. The specific of the syntax and semantics due contextual meaning of the concept “audiovisual art” in the contemporary art criticism discourse is investigated. In the post-Soviet art criticism discourse the “audiovisual art” concept is produced within the operating classical, well-established concepts, such as “screen arts”, “screen culture”, and the latest оne – “audiovisual culture”. Directly formulation “audiovisual art” in the contemporary post-Soviet art criticism discourse is found in two syntactic forms: as “audiovisual art” and in plural as “audiovisual arts”. The definition of denotative field of the concept in the post-Soviet art criticism discourse basically depends on the characteristics of relations between the two main parts of the “audiovisual art”: “visual” and “auditory”. These components can often be considered from the position of the equivalence, or vice versa, dominance of one of them as the part of an audiovisual art work. Rarely the precedents for enrollment in the audiovisual art work exclusively “auditory” or only “visual” component can be considered, but this point of view in the contemporary art criticism discourse is actively disputed. In the post-Soviet art criticism discourse the conceptual contradictions in the definition of “audiovisual art” can often be found. It is mainly caused by the lack of the deep reflection on the relevant definition. Within the post-Soviet definition of the denotative field of “audiovisual art” the exclusive high-tech specifics (such as the involvement of the new media, screen media) and the traditionality in a pure, non-hybrid way (for example the inclusion of the fine art in its classical sense) could be simultaneously stated. Among the post-Soviet typologies of the “audiovisual art” hierarchical positioning of the “audiovisual” kinds of art could be observed. Mostly typologies postulate the high-tech screen specifics of “audiovisual art” and its identification with the “screen arts” (in all its possible kinds as parts of the “screen culture”). All the variety of relevant typologies that define the denotative field of the “audiovisual art” could be reduced to one basic: differentiation of the interactive and traditional arts, that in ontological aspect do not include the direct interaction with the recipient. In some contexts, the sacralization of the “audiovisual art” not only as the part of “audiovisual culture” but the main force power of the further cultural genesis is considered. Unlike the post-Soviet art criticism discourse the western discourse mainly differentiate the denotative field of the “audiovisual art” concept not on the basis of presence / absence of “auditory” component but on the basis of the inclusion in the creation of audiovisual art works the newest digital technologies. The so-called “visual art” is postulated as the field of the traditional (particularly screen) arts that include visual component, while the “audiovisual art” is considered as the complex of the newest contemporary digital art practices, that accumulate and combine in new ways not only any possible “visual”, but also necessarily “auditory” material. However, audio and visual components of the “audiovisual art” may be taken and then combined from different kinds of art that include in their nature not only visual or screen specificity (for example music, literature, especially poetry, theater, different types of the traditional fine art and so on). Thus, the main characteristic of “audiovisual art” is its transgressive nature, which clearly is expressed in the species and genre diffusion combined with the digital ontological specificity. The important role in determining the denotative field of “audiovisual art” concept in the western art criticism discourse plays the confirmation of the virtual, immersive and interactive nature of the art practices it includes. However, some reflections reduce the diversity of all possible “audiovisual arts” only to those that in their technological basis contain so-called “live” show that a priori excludes consideration of the “non-broadcasted” arts.