R. M. Rusin, PhD, Assosiate Professor
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyev
60, VolodymyrskaStrit,Kyev, 01033, Ukraine
CORPORALITY AS AN ATTRIBUTE OF SCULPTURE(EUROPEAN CONTEXT)
The historical development of art is a change of paradigms. Each paradigm contains a special understanding of art, defined bothby the act of creativity itself and by the evaluation of its results. It is especially important to identify the origins of these changes, identify their stages, and determine the direction of the evolution of artistic creativity. In this context, corporeality as an artistic paradigm of European sculpture is considered in an article in the historical dimension from classics to postmodernism. Background research driven by changes that have suffered over the past century art not only in terms of formative principles, but also in terms of being a work of art. The term "art" is not given apriori; itis inseparable from the historical conditions of its own realization and filled with different content. In ancient tradition, from which theoretical understanding of artoriginates, provides an understanding of art as mimetic activity. For plastic art of the ancient Greeks man was the epitome of all things, the prototype of all creation and the created. The human body in great shape was almost the only model of art aesthetic. The Greeks thought it only as a stature completeness. For the Greeks, body language was the language of soul, although Greek plastics did not know what analysis characters the cult of the individual, which is typicalfor the art of modern times. Plasticity, the ancient body kinetics can be regarded as some elements of thesemantic structure of a particular language as a kind of mimicry. Plastic modern European sculpture shows opposite tothe ancient classics, Christian traditional relationship of mind and body. Antiquity knew dualism of mind and body, and provided perception of the gods only in the body incarnation. Christianity brought a legislateddualism and brought early naive monism attitudeinto the historically natural decay. In the art of the Renaissance in Europe, due to rethinking of ancient Christian tradition, experience acquires the tendency of forming an image of ideal body oriented on classic examples. In the mid-nineteenth century, under the influence of a new understanding of human corporeality was an appeal to antiquity qualitatively new level due to the growing trend of "naturalization" in human culture and criticism concerning the previous historical periods. In the culture of the twentieth century, there was a quite relevant anthropological stance of negativism. Justification ofindividual values has led to a lack of uniform standards, because itwas perceived as an encroachment on personality. The natural beauty in all its perfection, the image of which was the purpose and content of Antiquity plasticsand the Renaissance art lost all its worthiness and has becomea subject of neglecting within the postmodernism.
Key words: corporeality, sculpture, classical art, modernism, postmodernism, artistic image, simulacrum.
1. Alberti Leon-Battista. (1935) Ten Books on Architecture. Vol.1. Moskow, Publishing house of the All-Union Academy of Architecture (In Russian).
2. Bykhovskaya, I. M. (2000) Homo somatikos: the axiology of the human body. Moskow, Editorial URSS (In Russian).
3. Vipper, B. R. (1985) Introduction to the historical study of art. Moskow, Arts, (In Russian).
4. Volynsky, A. L. (1992) Book of Glee. Moskow, Art (In Russian).
5. Genis, A. (1997) The Tower of Babel. The Art of the Present. Essays. Moskow, Nezavisimaya gazeta (In Russian).
6. Damascene, John. (1913) Complete collection of the works of St. John of Damascus. St. Petersburg.
7. Dmitrieva, N. A. (1987) A Brief History of Arts. In three issues. Issue. 1. Moskow, Art (In Russian).
8. Zharov, L. V. (1988) Human Corporeality: a Philosophical Analysis. Rostov-on-Don, Publishing house of the Russian State University(In Russian).
9. Istorija jestetiki. Pamjatniki mirovoj jesteticheskoj mysli: v 5 t., t.1 (1962) [History of Aesthetics. Monuments of World Aesthetic Thought: in
5 tons] / [otv. red. Ovsjannikov M. F.]. Moskow, Publishing House of the Academy of Arts of the USSR.
10. Istorija jesteticheskoj mysli: v 6 t., t.1 (1985) [History of aesthetic thought: in 6 vol.] pod red. M. F. Ovsjannikova, T. V. Ljubimovoj; sost. V. V. Bychkov / In-t filosofii AN SSSR; sektor jestetiki. Moskow, Art.
11. Kagan, M. S. (1997) Aesthetics as a philosophical science. St. Petersburg, LLP TC "Petropolis" (In Russian).
12. Xenophon of Athens. (1935) Domostroj [Domostroy]. In Socratic works: Memoirs of Socrates [Socratic works: Memoirs of Socrates]. Moskow, Academia.
13. Losev, A. F. (1979). The history of ancient aesthetics. Early Hellenism. Moskow, Art (In Russian).
14. Ljubke, V. (1870) History of plastic from ancient times to the present. Moskow, K.T. Soldatenkov (In Russian).
15. Ortega y Gasset, H. (1991) Dehumanization of art. Moskow, Rainbow (In Russian).
16. Podoroga, V. (1995) Phenomenology of the body. Introduction to philosophical anthropology. Materials of the lecture courses of 1992-1994. Moskow, Ad Marginem (In Russian).
17. Postmodernizm. Jenciklopedija (2001) [Postmodernism. Encyclopedia] sos. i nauch. red. A. A. Gricanov, M. A. Mozhejko. Minsk: Interpresservice; The Book House.
18. Reed, G. (2006) A Brief History of Modern Painting. Moskow, Art-21st century (In Russian).
19. Ryklin, M. K. (1997) Art as an Obstacle. Moskow, Ad Marginem (In Russian).
20. Artists of the ХХcentury(1974). Moskow, Soviet artist (In Russian).
21. Shmidt, I. M. (1980) Russkaja hudozhestvennaja skul'ptura konca XIX – nachala XX veka [Russian art sculpture late XIX ‒ early XX century]. In Izobrazitel'noe iskusstvo. Arhitektura. Dekorativno-prikladnoe iskusstvo [Fine Arts. Architecture. Decorative and applied arts]. Moskow, Art.
22. Schopenhauer, A. (1999) The World as Will and Representation: Collection op.: In 6 Vol. Vol.1. Moskow, TERRA - Book club "Republic"(In Russian).
23. Yampolsky, M. (1996) Demon and Labyrinth. (Diagrams, Deformations, Mimesis). Moskow, New literary review, VII (In Russian).
Corresponding author: R.M.Rusin
Copyright © 2017 Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv University Publishing