1. Art and reality

2. Content in art

2.1 Idealism and materialism

2.2 Various aspects of content

2.3 Topic - scope of content

2.4 Idea in content

3. Form in art

3.1 Inner and outer form

3.2 Artistic language of a work of art

3.3 Genre is a component of an art form

4. Unity of form and content

Conclusion.

Introduction

Content and form - philosophical categories, reflecting the relationship between the two sides of natural and social reality: a certain orderly set of elements and processes that form objects or a phenomenon, i.e. content, and the mode of existence and expression of this content, its various modifications, i.e. forms. The concept of Form is also used in the sense of the internal organization of the Content, and in this sense the problems of Form are further developed in the category of structure.

In the history of philosophy, especially idealistic, the Form was reduced to structure, and the Content was identified with a certain disordered set of elements and properties, which contributed to the consolidation and preservation of idealistic ideas about the primacy of Form over Content over a long historical period.

The relationship between Content and Form is a typical case of the relationship of dialectical opposites, characterized both by the unity of Content and form, and by the contradictions and conflicts between them. (Philosophical Dictionary. M. Politizdat, 1991).

What area artistic culture we did not consider - certain historical period in its development, direction, flow, creative individuality, and finally, a work of art - every time the problem of analyzing it in terms of content and form arises. Such important links in the artistic process as creativity and aesthetic perception also act in terms of formation, differentiation, synthesis and forms.

The entire history of art testifies that the artistic value and power of the impact of works of art largely depend on the expressiveness of the art form and on its correspondence to the content of the work. This is due to the fact that in the artistic representation of reality, the decisive role belongs to the artistic form, and the defining role belongs to the content of the work.

Theme “form and content” It seemed to me the most interesting in connection with the topic of my dissertation: I consider the concept of completeness in the visual arts. And completeness, as you know, arises from something, on the basis of something. In this case, the form that turns into content, and vice versa, is what allows us to talk about the completion, co-completion of the work. I think that purely art criticism categories do not sufficiently express the problem. Therefore, it seemed to me relevant to consider the problem of form and content from a philosophical point of view.

Art and reality

“ In art, as a means of expression, there is an atmosphere of charm, unnaturalness, something artificial, I would say, something almost magical, in which, apparently, only beauty should manifest itself for us. ”

/BUT. Banfi. Philosophy of Art p.34/

the artist creates a work of art not because he reflects his inner world in a certain image, but because with his help he expresses the need to elevate some form of life to the level of universal value typical of spirituality. A work of art is indeed a symbol, and its beauty is revealed by the endless quest that takes place in and outside of its soul, acquiring spirituality in its purest form. Not a single work of art, like any of the subjective states, realizes beauty in its purest form, absolutely pure ideality, free from any forms of the real that are necessary for its harmony.

“ This means that aesthetic life never succeeds in reaching the final concrete objectification, the actual value. The latter, by the way, is a value only because in each creation it reveals the presence of an ideal meaning that goes beyond a certain form. ”

/BUT. Banfi. Philosophy of Art page 35/

Through the total sphere of culture, the social structure aims art at the content that art must develop and saturate with the meaning of the historical situation proper. Thus, this structure has an impact on the whole complex of artistic reality, on its internal structure, identifying along the way the formal problems arising from updating the content. It is obvious, for example, that at the end of the Renaissance, the strengthening of the independence of the bourgeoisie, the resulting changes in views on urban and family life, on the relationship between town and country, the increase in some values ​​of life and the depreciation of others led to the appearance in art realistic tendencies. In this regard, let us recall interiors, landscapes, genre scenes, portraits, and still lifes. These genres, in turn, brought to life new compositional schemes, new formal problems associated with perspective, light, and color scheme, on which the emergence of new values ​​in painting also depended.

Another “ perfect sphere ” subject-object relationship is value, or rather value. Reducing them - as far as art is concerned - to a pure aesthetic value, although it may seem legitimate only with a superficial study. Indeed, at its core, a work of art is based on a series of values ​​more or less capable of harmonious synthesis. This is attention to the world around, and tradition, and vitality. These are ethical, technical, and actually aesthetic values. These latter, related to the complex and multifaceted social role of art, are not only an important aspect, moment, artistic persuasiveness in themselves, but also underlie other values, defining penetration into the fabric of a work of art. Social values ​​acquire an obvious originality in some types of art. Let us recall, for example, architecture and urban planning, theatrical art and small decorative forms. In general, they are inherent in all artistic fields and characterize important qualitative differences. Let's compare the visual “ publicity ” fresco painting and the intimacy of the picture, let us remember how social content differs from each other, which is an integral part of vocal and instrumental music and inherent in the instruments themselves.

“ We should also not forget that the strengthening of expressive forms and relationships that affect our sensations, emphasizing the emotional and figurative side of the content in a work of art leads to a concentration of attention on them and affects the foundations of their social structures and expressiveness. ”

/BUT. Banfi. Philosophy of Art p.186/

Art is the realization of the beautiful in the work of man. This realization can take place on a purely formal level, the realization of those canons of pure beauty, which the taste already “tested” by experience. But in this case, the work of art may be a skilful but soulless construction, whose beauty remains external to the reality of the object, which in turn frames it. Such is the case with decorative art.

“ A work of art should be aesthetically independent, should look like the result of absolute spontaneity, as if carrying in itself its own expediency, which determines all its aspects - spontaneity, as if carrying in itself its own expediency, which determines all its aspects. ”

/BUT. Banfi. Philosophy of Art p.189/

Such absolute spontaneity is the creative activity of a genius. But a genius can create only insofar as, in connection with a certain concept, a representation (aesthetic idea) is formed in him, which does not allow self-dissolution in this concept, but gives impetus to the unlimited development of thoughts, accompanied by an unlimited change of images, so that both abilities of the soul are imagination. and reason - comes in endlessly free movement in conditions of mutual coordination of various motives, of which one or me resonates most with the audience. A pure aesthetic image cannot be created in art without any connection with the ideal, and its value lies not in static contemplation, but in the diversity and depth of imagination and thoughts that it evokes.

Idealism and materialism

The aesthetic theories of objective idealism assert that the content of art is the absolute idea, the world spirit, the world will, in other words, the divine essence of the world. Art appears in the teachings of objective-idealistic aesthetics as a means of cognizing this spiritual essence of the world. The aesthetic theories of subjective idealism assert that the content of art is the absolutely subjective, arbitrary, arbitrary, unconditioned activity of the individual subject. The subjective idealists reduce the content of art to an emanation of the inner “I” of the artist, to the expression of an individual soul, psyche, torn off from the real world.

In contrast to idealistic aesthetics, materialistic aesthetics claims that art draws its content not from a divine idea, not from the arbitrariness of the subject, but from reality, from relationships, contradictions and essential current development of social life.

Thus, the “Theory of Imitation” of reality in art, which originated in the ancient world and developed by the humanists of the Renaissance and the enlighteners of the 18th century, considered the content of art to be life, nature, “nature”, depicted in it. Supporters of the materialistically understood theory of "Imitation" at various stages of its historical development- Aristotle, Leonardo da Vinci, D. Diderot, G. Lesslich.

A problem arises: the problem of the relationship between physical reality and the objectivity of art. In nature - development, an endless process, characterized by a variety of forms, then in reality of art, they are fixed in a pure and immovable form, acting as completeness or eternity. The reality of art is something less and at the same time more than the reality of nature, and yet it is closely connected with the latter. This is clearly manifested in the plastic and fine arts where the works are inspired or shown by natural reality. In this context, art faces a contradiction. Being conditioned by its form, it appears either as an ideal truth, or as a simple modeling force, or as a formally creative activity.

In a brief sketch of 1789, "A simple imitation of nature, manner, style," Chete distinguishes three stages of the relationship between a work of art and the reality of nature. A work of art may be a simple imitation of nature, and its value lies in its ability to skillfully reproduce a natural object. The Flemish still life is the most typical example of this way of depicting. A method of a lower level, for art appears here only as a means of reproducing nature, depicted with such skill and diligence that it, as it were, lifts the work of art itself.

A higher level is the manner, which means a free perception of natural reality, consistent with the temperament of the artist.

Turning into an individual technique, such perception is established as a typical artist's manner. In other words, a manner is a characteristic in art, which is objectively fixed in an individual or collective (school) vision of the surrounding reality. Only in the case when the artist, in his personal perception of reality, frees the latter from its abstract external form and from the meanings imposed by its special relations, and reveals its deeper essence in an ideal-objective structure, where the spirit and nature recognize each other, does it really happen achievement of the highest stage of art, i.e. style.

Nature creates a living indifferent being. The artist, on the contrary, is dead but significant, nature creates something real, and the artist creates something imaginary. Natural reality lives, and its life is not just the flowering of a certain idea, but rather the struggle of the latter against the influence of random circumstances. Art is on the other side of life, it expresses a pure ideal form, acting as a necessity, satisfied in itself and acting directly as beauty.

Hegel poses the problem of art. His theory of the absolute spirit consists of three points: Art, Religion, and Philosophy.

He has the concept of beauty not as an abstract value that formally defines individual beautiful objects, but as a principle that determines the structure of the aesthetic sphere, and its internal tension, its problems, its movements. The beautiful is a sensual manifestation of an idea, an idea not as a universal abstraction, but as a universal, containing and developing in itself a special - absolute unity itself (which is an endless process in which the real and the rational adapt to each other), since it is expressed in the final form of the sensible . This is the manifestation in sensual completeness of the absolute principle of the unity and existence of the real. Beauty is independently realized in the sphere of art, which is the realm of the ideal, since the “Ideal” means an unrevealed idea, and its very manifestation in all its purity.

This is a sensual form, freed from the play of necessity and chance, which is subject to natural experience, and balanced in accordance with the internal laws of individual existence. Art is therefore not an imitation of natural reality, but the creation of an ideal world rooted in the sensuous, in which sensuous forms are free from their relativity and finiteness and become the actuality of an idea that breathes into them a soul and endows them with an absolute spiritual individuality. From this concept of the ideal, Hegel derives both the structural elements of the work of art in itself and its various relationships, individual and social meanings, and the nature of the creative subjectivity of the artist.

In classical art, form and content correspond to each other: they are manifestations of intuitive humanity and its pure ideality as spirit, when individuality is provided by the whole and vice versa.

This is absolute art.

Absolute art goes through three stages:

one . abstract work

2. Live work

3. Spiritual.

1. Art is an expression of absolute, ideal, moral balance in the form in which it is ideally experienced by the subject.

1.1 The paired form is immediate, abstract and singular. This is an objective and material image of the deity. The artist puts all the moral substance into the work of art. This is nothing but an individualistic certainty that does not have any reality in his work and is valuable as an activity in general, going beyond the framework of the work itself.

1.2 The second abstract art form is an expression of self-consciousness that accompanies the statues of the deity and gives it value.

1.3 The third form, uniting and organizing the first two, is a cult.

2. In living art, the cult becomes the very seat of the deity. Mystery and festivity: the presence of a deity manifests itself as an orgy, on the other hand, as the deification of man in his beauty. Both of these moments find unity in the language of art.

“Through an artistic religion, the spirit and form of substance passed into the form of the subject, for this religion creates the form of the subject and the manifestation, thus, in it the action or self-consciousness, which only disappears in the fear-inspiring substance and does not comprehend itself in hope. This incarnation of the divine essence begins with the statue, which has only an external form of selfhood, and "internal", the activity of incarnation proceeds outside this form; in the cult, both sides merged into one, as a result - the artistic religion is a unity, completed, passed simultaneously also into a short term of selfhood; in the spirit, which knows itself quite authentically in the singularity of consciousness, all essentiality is linked. The proposition which expresses this frivolity is that the self is the absolute essence.

/Hegel. Sog. T.4 p.399/

Various aspects of content

When asked about the content of art, we usually answer that the content of art is reality. Ultimately, this is so: with more or less mediation, conventionality, normativity, freedom of imagination and fantasy, art recreates the surrounding world, man, values. But since the content of the object is contained in itself, and not outside it, then the artistic content belongs to the sphere of art.

The separation of those components of art that are determined by reality that exists independently, from those that determine the creative subject, is a difficult task. theoretical task. Of course, these aspects of art are interconnected to a limited extent both in the process of creativity and in the work of art. If the results scientific research subjective moments are eliminated as much as possible, then in art they can be deliberately accentuated, representing an aesthetic and artistic value.

The concept of objective and subjective in relation to artistic activity. The object of reflection for art can be thoughts, experiences, emotions of other people that exist in addition to the spiritual world of a creative person - this is on the one hand.

On the other hand, the dependence of the content of art on the creative subject expresses the dependence of not only a subjective, but also an objective nature, since the artist’s views, ideals, and tastes belong not only to him personally, but indicate the socio-historical processes of reality. Expressing his worldview, his emotions, the artist cognizes and objectifies them with the help of material - means of expression art. The created work of art becomes a fact of objective aesthetic impact on society, as an aesthetic value it outlives its creator, is included in the cultural and historical process along with other values. In turn, the creative person as a "source" of the content of art is reflected in the act of subjective, valuable "re-creation" of reality and in the process of objective socio-historical existence of a work of art.

Due to the fact that the value of an object is expressed in a person’s emotional attitude to reality or is for an individual, with his unique personal world, the moral values ​​of social life are represented in art by their emotional and spiritual significance for the whole personality. The artistic content reveals the spiritual consequences of one or another philosophical, socio-psychological position of a person.

The aesthetic and artistic specificity of content in art arises not in the autonomous, closed sphere of the work as such, but in the close interaction of intra-artistic meanings with those meanings, ideas, and assessments that are formed in a wide sphere of reality. Thus, the analysis of the topic reveals the relationship in the content of art with the problems of the current socio - historical situation and cultural - artistic tradition, the object of reproduction, the object of knowledge - evaluation and "Internal" with its own specific laws of the world. artwork.

Theme is the scope of the content.

Let us dwell on such an area of ​​content as the Theme. The circle of phenomena of reality depicted in a work of art is usually called its theme. But the concept of the topic is not unambiguous. There are three groups of meanings that have historically taken shape in aesthetics and art theory.

The first of them goes back to the object theme. Taken in this sense, the notion of a theme characterizes not a component of artistic content as such, but its real origins that are in reality. With the help of this meaning, the concept of a theme is related to the phenomena of the objective world, isolated by public consciousness from the stream of historical development, natural processes, or to reproduction objects selected by the artist, but considered abstractly - conceptually, outside the specific artistic structure of the work of art. Since the category "Theme" does not correspond here with the artistic image itself, this value does not yet give grounds for qualifying it as artistic.

The second group of meanings of the theme already refers to a certain meaningful unity of the work itself. Artistically - a specific theme is not something external in relation to art, which is outside of it. The theme in this sense becomes one of the main categories, with the help of which the “Internal” content of art is explored, arising as a result of the selection of phenomena of reality, their emotional and aesthetic assessment and embodiment in a certain structure with the help of material and expressive means.

In the visual arts, the directly expressed content - the spatial - objective world, the visual environment, the mediated content - is the area of ​​emotionally semantic values ​​and assessments, then in the art of the word the mentally - emotional sphere is expressed directly, and the pictorial - visual - indirectly.

Some believe that the main thing in music is the inaudible, in plastic arts ah - invisible, in sculpture - movement and time. Others say the exact opposite.

In reality, the concrete artistic theme is closely linked with the directly presented content, and thus with the form of embodiment.

A specific artistic theme cannot be adequately retold, it must be seen, heard, however, like all other components of the content of a work of art. A work can develop one big theme or several themes with the dominance of one of them, or a number of relatively equal themes - it all depends on the type, genre, creative individuality in the system of which it was created.

Let's call the theme in the third meaning "cultural-typological" - it fixes the meaningful connection of a work of art with a socio-aesthetic tradition. In this sense, the theme characterizes the content commonality of many works of art. This is a repeated reproduction of similar socio-psychological collisions, embodied in the works of artists who developed in a certain style and direction of art, which became part of the genre. It is, as it were, a synthesis of figurative values ​​created by art under the influence of reality, then consolidated by the course of social and cultural development and again returned to the artistic sphere in the context of other cultural phenomena.

In the visual arts, “plot” usually means the specific theme of the work “a specific event”, in contrast to “theme” as a reflection of a wider subject of the image (a wider sphere of phenomena from which the depicted event is borrowed).

The idea of ​​a work of art is its main meaning, which determines its social significance. The idea enters into the content of the artistic process together with the theme and is inseparable from it. It permeates the entire artistic image, its specific thematic fabric.

The idea of ​​a work of art can be formulated in abstract terms, but in a real work it is not abstract, but sensually concrete, figurative.

It must be taken into account that the content of a work of art is socially and individually significant not only for its creator, but also for every person who perceives art. The perception of a work of art is not a passive, but an active process. In this process, the content that is objectively inherent in the work is always refracted through the prism of the perceiver's consciousness. It is recognized in connection with all its social and personal experience. This content seems to be supplemented by numerous associations and ideas, it evokes various thoughts that are not directly contained in the work itself, but are drawn from the contemporary social and personal life of the perceiving person.

A work of art, being active, creatively experienced by people who perceive it, as if enters into their individual life takes on special significance. Therefore, the perception of the content of the same work by people of different eras, countries, individuals is not the same, it has different shades.

The activity of the subject, of course, matters in the perception of art, but it is secondary in relation to the objective content, arises on its basis and cannot change it.

Form in art.

In a broad philosophical sense, form in art is a way of expressing and existing content. In its formation, the decisive role belongs to a specific ideological and artistic content. Like content, it has its own structure and order. The category of art form is no less complex than the category of content. Sometimes they speak of a relatively constant, unchanging characteristic of a complex object, while the form is spoken of as a variant, a variety of content. But in most cases, a different meaning is meant: form in unity with artistic content. Outside of this transition into content and back, form has no real existence. And this is not only in the process of creativity, but also in the process of perception of an already finished work. art form is the process of objectification of a specific artistic content. The art form is the internal structure of the content, the way of its manifestation and existence in artistic images, embodied by certain material means according to the laws of a given type and genre of art.

Internal and external form.

In accordance with the philosophical tradition, internal and external forms are distinguished. The internal form is a way of expressing and transforming the orderliness of the content into the orderliness of the form, in other words, the structural and compositional aspect of a work of art. The internal form is the structure - characters, characters, plots, from a certain point of view - the composition. The inner form, the image, which is still in the mind of the artist, guides his search for a suitable external form, as well as his work with the material and the "Language" of art.

The external form is a material representational means, organized in a certain way to embody the content, the internal form. There is a significant difference between the processes of creating an internal and an external form. The inner form arises together with the content while still in the concept, where the original outlines of the artistic image are outlined. Any work has a unique, only inherent internal form.

The inner form is not only a connecting link between the outer form and content, but it is also the content in relation to the outer form. The plot, the idea, the composition, need a certain material, certain ways of incarnation, as a result, an external form, an objective being of an artistic image is obtained. An important feature of the external form is its relative independence in relation to the content and internal form. The outer form is not entirely recreated in the creative process. Many of its elements ("Language", the laws of the material) exist as independent phenomena with their own history and tradition.

The artistic language of a work of art.

In a broad philosophical, aesthetic sense, "Form in Art" covers both "Artistic Language" and specifically a unique form and correlates with the content of art as a whole, its separate type, direction.

The art form directly and more indirectly, through the language of art, is also influenced by the material and its features.

In any art, artistic images are created with the help of specific material means, different in each type of art, developed in the process of the historical development of artistic practice. The form of an artistic image, expressing its content, is formed from the interconnection and interaction of these means.

In art, the figurative, artistic "Vision", "hearing" of reality, including the artist's relationship to this reality, is imprinted, moreover, formed in material material that receives specific processing. This material is thus included in the form of an artistic image and, acting on our senses, gives us direct knowledge of the very reflection of reality, as it exists in the artist's head. Aesthetic content can be conveyed only by means that affect aesthetically, that is, expressing through a sensually concrete sphere the "Humanized" essence of phenomena. Only the material senses can directly influence the sensual sphere.

Sculpture and painting borrow their language mainly from the sphere of human life. The simplest expressive elements used in their language - volume and plane, line and shape, color and chiaroscuro, and others - necessarily acquire an exact objective meaning, correlate with certain sensory-specific phenomena of reality. The paint on the artist's palette is the material, on the canvas - component carrier object. In a freehand drawing, paper is both the material and the "Carrier" of the finished work of art. The artist, in the process of implementing the idea, seeks to reveal the possibilities of the material, artistically accentuate them and "beat" them. Features of the material affect the form, and through it - the content.

Genre is a component of an art form.

Genre is one of the most important components of an art form. The genre "attachment" of a work is indeed a necessary condition for the observance of certain substantive and formal norms and rules. But this condition is developed on the basis of common cultural experience in the process of the complex development of the genre itself.

Artistic genres are the product of the totality of artistic reality, they represent a typical area for the application of the efforts of art, and because they embody a certain cultural meaning. Three conditions make it possible to single out a still life from an integral artistic composition and turn it into a special artistic genre. All of them are connected with the conquest of the autonomy of aesthetic problems, with the formation of art as a world in itself with its own needs.

1. Art again turns to reality and leaves the traditional interpretations of nature, based on the principle of idealization of reality, according to which the latter matters only if it is capable of acquiring spiritual value.

2. At the end of the 16th century, art, having gained complete freedom, deals with completely independent problems, turns to those subjects that present more opportunities to satisfy new interests.

3. In accordance with the isolation and increasing importance of certain special social functions, the desire to decorate life begins to have an impact on art.

It was during this period that the still life acquires a self-pressing meaning, acts as an ornament. When depicting a still life, the artist has at his disposal a piece of space where he builds a plot and a three-dimensional composition, having such freedom that will allow him to create plastic values ​​in close unity with color tones.

We have indicated the historical significance of the still life, its formal value, the spiritual meaning that permeates this genre and announces itself in the construction of the picture. The primordial nature of things, their hidden "demonism" appeared before us as the meaning of the content of a still life, but once revealed, this reality was "lost", turning into a pure play of light and forms.

Conclusion: the relationship between the content and form of a work of art does not come down to dualism, not to abstract unity, but is a complex expression of internal dialectics, where opposite poles act as carriers of the potentially independent development of their own problems, their own values, and at the same time converge and unite into artistic reality, like two beams of light emanating from different sources, superimposed on each other in a single image and immediately diverge in opposite directions.

We can fully call a genre certain norms for creating the content and form of works of art that will be repeated many times, fixed in the minds of artists and the public.

Unity of form and content.

In art, there is no ready-made content and ready-made form in their separation, but there is a mutual procedural composition in the act of creativity and not a separate existence in the work as a result creative process.

Secondly, the dependence of the form of artistic language on the content can be traced at the level of the creative process, the purpose of which is the embodiment of a meaningful, densely emotional concept with the help of certain expressive means.

Thirdly, in a finished work of art, the form exists in order to express the content, meanings and meanings.

There is no "pure" form in art, without relative content. Where the form is not subordinated to the content, does not express it, it is destroyed as such. A natural question is about the relationship between the problem of the unity of content and form and the problem of the integrity of such a complex object as a work of art. These problems are close, but not identical. To some extent, considering the problem of integrity, we also consider the problem of the unity of content and form, but at the same time we focus on the inseparability of reciprocity, the mutual transition of content and form, as well as on their correspondence to each other, while the unity of content and form also implies their internal tension, contradictions that are observed in individual works of art.

The form of any particular work is compositionally integral and figuratively unique, depending on the originality of the content of this work. The talent and skill of the artist lies largely in the search for the most complete form, as well as the most appropriate to the idea.

The greatest activity of the form, both internal and external, is manifested in the composition. The composition of a work of art is the artistic harmonization of plot-thematic, plastic (and for painting and light-color) elements into an integral work. Composition as a characteristic and means of an artistic form has features at the levels of internal and external form. Why does composition play a leading role in combining content and form, along with the implementation of the expressiveness and ingenuity of works of fine art? This follows from the fundamental role of the structures of displayed objects, that is, from the structural characteristic of the content of the image, knowledge.

The plot-thematic level of content is embodied in the first semantic level of the internal form - in the general composition and works of plastic arts. According to the compositional laws, the artist, first of all, performs the operations of identifying and placing on the plane of the canvas, the paper of the “compositional domain”, organizing the nucleus, determines the main “heroes” and objects of the environment; at the same time, searches and selection of options are underway overall dynamics the interaction of characters according to the plan and the characteristic fact of the event. In the overall composition of the work, its general emotional mood is also revealed as a manifestation of the artist's pathos. In the art of painting, this is expressed in the color of the picture, as well as in the nature of the language, style, individual techniques of the artist.

Further, the design of the idea moves to the ideological and psychological level of content, at which there is a deeper and more comprehensive identification of the characters, mental properties of the characters, their states and experiences, as well as the subjective attitude and assessment of them by the artist. Entering the spiritual world of his characters helps the artist to concretize the general idea and composition of the work: to play individual fragments, the relationship of the characters, the artist makes adjustments to the composition itself, and also determines the facial expressions, postures, movements of the characters. This ideological and psychological level corresponds to the plastic level of the composition of the work. At this level, the general ideas of the work and the psychological characteristics of the characters are transformed into specific - sensual models - the images of the characters with the image of the external appearance, facial structure and expression, spatial arrangement, figure, posture, movement. At the plastic level, the overall composition is concretized by the structures of the characters and the objects of their action, that is, the artist conveys thoughts and feelings through the spatial structures of the appearance of the characters and furnishings.

Plastic composition is carried out by plastic methods of organizing the spatial structures of images of objects. These structures constitute the level of content in a work of fine art, since through their means the authors display the world and express their thoughts and feelings with plastic-spatial means of composition and transmit them to the viewer.

The plastic level of composition in painting also includes light-color relations.

Conclusion.

To determine the form and content of a phenomenon means to investigate it.

/Hegel, Sog, vol. 1 hit. 133, M - L., 1933 tr.224/

Historically, the category “form” developed and took shape. In Aristotle, it even plays the role of content. Idealism has always exaggerated the importance of form at the expense of content. The content of an objective process and the content of the idea that reflected it are different, just as the object and the reflection are different. Content is the totality of all internal, essential, general and individual elements and processes in a given phenomenon. Form is a special unity, a way of manifesting the organization of the structure of content.

Only thanks to the organic unity of content and form is a work of art able to influence the consciousness of the masses, to awaken in them high moral and aesthetic feelings.

The main provisions on the relationship between content and form include:

3. The art form has an active expressive, pictorial, operational communicative function.

4. Compliance of the features of the artistic form of a work with its poetic content is the main criterion for the artistic form and integrity of a work of art.

Literature:

1. Yuldashev L.G. Art: Philosophical Problems of Research. M.: "Thought" 1981 - 247 p.

2. Goranov K. Content and form in art. M.: "Art" 1962. –271s.

3. Banfi A. Philosophy of art. M.: "Art" 1989 –384s.

4. Volkova E.V. The problem of content and form in art. M.: "knowledge" 1976 - 64s.

5. Tyukhtin V.S. Yu.F. Larnich Content and form in art. M.: "Knowledge" 1984. –64s.

6. Art and religion in the history of philosophy. Chisinau "Shtinntsa" 1980 – 146 p.

7. Vaislov V. Content and form in art. M: "Art" 1956 - 370 p.

8. Burlins E.Ya. Culture and genre

9. Vaislo V. Fine Arts and Problems of Aesthetics.

10. Ten N.A. Philosophy of art.

11. Questions of philosophy. 1994 №7 / 8 Akopyan K.Z. Etienne Souriau: Philosophical reflection on art or aesthetic reflection on philosophy.

12. Questions of Philosophy 1994 №4 Berger L.G. Spatial image of the world (cognition paradigm) in the structure of artistic style.

13. Questions of philosophy 1994 №7 / 8 Surio E. Art and philosophy.

reconstruction of objective and subjective reality in the expressive means of art. In art, the process of updating the formal apparatus is constantly going on. At the same time, there is a certain adherence to traditionalism here. Along with innovations, art, following the passions of artists, spectators, readers, listeners, conducts a kind of selection of the most universal forms, valuable in a number of parameters - capacity, concentration, elegance, sophistication, etc. For example, since the time of I.S. Bach's forms of fugues, polyphonic cycles, etc. have been preserved almost unchanged.

Among the "traditional" forms in various types art can be attributed: in literature (poetry and prose) the form of a sonnet, a romance (Spanish romance of the 17th century), an elegy, an ode, a story (the so-called small forms), a story, a novel, a multi-volume literary cycle (J. Joyce, J. Galsworthy and others). In the visual arts, there is no less variety: pictorial watercolor and large painting, graphic miniature and large-scale mosaic, portrait, caricature, etc. In cinema and theater: short films and huge serials, small plays for one or two actors and large-scale tetralogy-type opuses. Many forms are also traditional for music: sonata, partita, symphony, concertos for a variety of instruments, including orchestral concertos.

H.f. can be understood in two ways. In the narrow interpretation of H.f. there is a structure subdivided into parts, elements. So, in music, the sonata is usually written in the form of the so-called. sonata allegro, which, as a rule, includes three parts: an exposition of thematic material, its development and reprise. Each of the parts can be considered in more detail - up to the level of analysis of the smallest trace elements. Continuing the illustration on musical material, we can say that even such a "smallest" quality of music as pitch, the critic has the right to consider from v.sp. its function in relation to the artistic intent of the work. The division of form into micro- and macrolevels is necessary for a professional analysis of the "building material" of art and the principles of its formation.

In a broad sense, H.f. is a means (or a set of means) with the help of which the artistic content of a work is "formed". The art of form creation (excluding only professional creative experiment) is always the art of forming new content.

The artistry of form is the biggest mystery in the entire phenomenology of art.

The future of H.f. can be associated with a spatio-temporal characteristic (ultimate compression - hypergrowth, hyperbolization of monumentalism - microminiaturization, extreme brevity - seriality), with increased expressiveness and figurativeness, sometimes to their complete merger, with an increase in the role of symbolization. The future of form creation largely determines the future of art itself.

Losev A.F. The dialectic of art form. M., 1927; Aristotle. On the art of poetry. M., 1957; Kagan M.S. Morphology of the arts. M., 1972. Ch. 1-3; Granovsky M.G. Thinking, language, semantics // The problem of musical thinking. M., 1974; Bakhtin M.M. Questions of literature and aesthetics. M., 1975; Goethe I.V. About art. M., 1975.

Form - Style - Expression Losev Alexey Fedorovich

14. CLASSIFICATION OF TYPES OF ART FORM

a) Species are eidetic.

1. Anyone who has closely followed the course of all the previous discussions cannot fail to note the following circumstance. First, the “antinomy of fact”, having determined the relation of the artistic form to the fact, gave way to antinomies, which no longer paid any attention to this fact, that is, to the fact, to the work of art. After all, we focused exclusively on the semantic sphere, where we first found “metaxia”, then we characterized this “metaxia” in detail. In it, we found 1) abstract semantic objectivity, or eidos, 2) its otherness - also as an abstract category, 3) prototype, 4) modification of eidos in the light of the prototype, 5) modification of matter and otherness in the light of the prototype. The fact, as we see, which we abandoned after the first antinomy, remained outside our consideration. Now that we have worked out the semantic details of the artistic form in more or less detail, we can and must no longer simply determine the relation of the artistic form to the fact of art, but also, in essence, talk about what is done with the fact when it is associated with the form. Secondly, the entire previous dialectical analysis of the artistic form can by no means be considered complete in and of itself. Let us recall our definition of an artistic form in § 6. In contrast to the concept of the energy of an essence, or a simple expression (§ 4), we have introduced here another moment of fact, the physical, as it were, realization of an expression (1st moment). Of course, an artistic form as an expression can be conceived and executed in thought in such detail as will give a complete realization of the artistic object and without the involvement of physical and any other material. However, if “art” for us is not only a mental occupation, but also a certain physical-physiological-psychological-sociological realization of what was planned, then the “artistic form” in the full sense of the word should be not just the energy of the essence and not just an expression of the essence, which was not so much an artistic sphere as a purely aesthetic one, but also the actual realization and embodiment of this energy and this expression. We must consider precisely the facts of art, artistic facts, and only then will it be a consideration of truly artistic forms.

Until now, we have always started from facts and proved that art is not a fact, but a meaning. This, we said, is one or another modification in the sphere of meaning. But we needed this only in order to understand the facts. Meaning is needed only in order to understand the facts, because the true meaning is always the real meaning, the meaning of the fact. And now, only now we are returning to the naive reality, which we left for the sake of an abstract thought necessary for understanding this reality. Only now can we once again not be afraid of facts, not because we are naive, but because we see these facts in our minds. Thus, dialectics becomes a real and living perception of naive reality, and thus the philosopher returns to the freshness and simplicity of childhood experiences, where there is no difference between fantasy and reality. This antithesis does not exist for us now; and we already know how terribly real other fantasy is, and how fantastic and enchanting the most ordinary and everyday reality is. There is no difference between personalities, living and dead, from symbols, and therefore we defined the artistic form, as an example of the naive perception of living and naive reality, in § 6 with simple, albeit obtained as a result of complex dialectics, words: it is a symbol as a person, or personality as a symbol.

2. a) Now we have come to the fact of art, and from now on nothing should interest us, except facts. The facts of art are its true artistic facts. Consequently, the power and strength of one pure dialectic ceases, and an empirical analysis of the real facts of the historical arts begins, although the facts - and we will firmly note this - are arts, and nothing else. There is no need, of course, to repeat that this empirical analysis, like any other, can only be carried out under the guidance of the same phenomenological-dialectical method. From the fact that the art form is a person, it does not follow, of course, that we have become blind empiricists and have forgotten our philosophical goals.

All our general discussions about the concept of artistic form, constructed exclusively phenomenologically-dialectically, must come close to the empirical material of the arts. What has been constructed up to now is, after all, the categorical conditions of nothing but a concretely given art. Therefore, we must see what needs to be done for a real transition from the general categorical phenomenological dialectics of the artistic form to its empirical analysis. Zro is the problem of transition from general to private aesthetics. General aesthetic should lead to particular types of aesthetics, for example. to poetics, or musical aesthetics, entrusting them with an empirical-aesthetic analysis based on the concepts and methodology developed by it. Private aesthetics, as we see, is the science of real embodiments of artistic forms.

b) In two respects, our previous research needs to be supplemented. First, the analysis of the art form given in the previous one pursued the goal of exclusively logical completeness, regardless of the modes of empirical existence of a real work of art. But as soon as we move on to this empiricism, we immediately come across the fact of the separate and solitary existence of certain moments of the artistic form. In the form, taken as such, as a complete whole, all subordinate moments are united by an indestructible bond and are dissected only in the order of deliberate philosophical abstraction. However, nothing prevents the empirical functioning of one or the other moment in art, this or that combination of them. Embodied in its own separateness, each moment also gives rise to a special type of art, or a special kind of it, a special artistic form.

c) Secondly, since we now want to talk about the fact of art, about real works of art, and since real fact there can only be a socio-historical fact, insofar as every artistic form must be interpreted by us as a socio-historical structure. In the synthesis of the "antinomy of fact" we have already seen the whole need to interpret the art form as a social being, but then it was only a task for us, since we did not yet know what an art form was in general. Now we know this, and therefore now it is time to move on to the social structure of the form. Any being, natural, scientific, artistic, philosophical, not to mention the physical, physiological, psychological and naturalistic-causal-sociological, any even individual human being is, in comparison with social being, the purest abstraction. Moreover. Everything we know about nature, science, etc., all of which carries a necessary social structure. The infinite, absolutely mechanical world of the latest natural science is, as I have pointed out more than once (for example, in the Philosophy of the Name, § 24), a real myth, and from this alone one can speak of its social structure. I'm not talking about other cosmologies that contain the social basis consciously and from the very beginning. For me, history is not a moment in nature, in space, but space and nature are a moment in history, in a certain socio-historical setting. Therefore, if we want to continue our aesthetics further, then we must pass already to the sociology of art in the broadest sense of the word, or to real history art in general. We have previously rejected all sociological explanations as presupposing a certain kind of abstraction and naturalistic metaphysics. Now the artistic form has absorbed all this sociality into itself, and in this way both pure dialectics and the boundless richness of the empiricism of form were saved at once. We now turn our eyes to the history of art and its art forms and begin to see the dialectic of art history itself, or, more generally, the philosophy of art history. From now on, for us, as for dialecticians, the history of art is inseparable from the philosophy of the history of art, and, even more than that, it is completely identical with the philosophy of the history of art. However, I will not deal with the sociology of art in this work. This is the task of other departments of my aesthetics. Now I will only point out the amazing examples of the philosophical-historical and socio-historical construction of the theory of art by Hegel. Instead of any endless preliminary and methodological rantings about the sociology of art, he directly gives an analysis of the entire history of art, and such principles as the division of art into symbolic, classical and romantic, or, for example, the entire characterization of classical art, etc., will forever remain dialectically inaccessible models. -historical analysis of real-life art. Postponing all this sociology to another work of mine, however, I want in this work to give a definition of those partial forms of art that I spoke about earlier and which, in their separate incarnation, each time give a special kind of artistic forms.

3. We designed the concept of art form. It is natural to ask: what kind of artistic forms are possible at all? This should lead us to a special aesthetic. To resolve now the question of the types of artistic form, it is necessary to take into account the basic semantic data on which it rests. Such a given is the meaning itself, or eidos. A myth is strung on it; the form itself, or expression, is strung on the mythical eidos. So, taking the eidos from its different sides, we can get different types of forms in general.

What is eidos? It is singularity given as the mobile rest of self-identical difference. Invoking a further complication of this concept, a complication that does not introduce anything new, but only details its main dialectical significance, we spoke about the singularity of alogical becoming, given as the mobile peace of self-identical difference. We can therefore base ourselves on the first definition, invoking the second one where necessary.

a) Firstly, we can consider eidos from the point of view of its singularity (i.e., meaning as an individually existing), abstracting from other categories. Of course, there can be no complete abstraction, since these categories are necessarily present wherever there is at least some object of thought. However, putting forward one category in spite of others, we, without eliminating these latter, subordinate them to the category we have chosen. So, we take in eidos its singularity, its indivisible meaning, and we look at individual categories only as a necessary accompaniment. If we keep in mind the artistic form and put forward in it the category of its individuality, i.e., its indivisible meaning, then it is clear that this will be the artistic form of the word. The word is just that construction that reproduces the single, indivisible meaning of the subject. Of course, the word captures all other categories, but it subordinates them to itself.

b) Secondly, we can consider eidos from the point of view of its self-identical difference, abstracting from all other categories of eidos. Here we do not pay attention either to the individual meaning of the object, or to its rest or movement, but simply look at what differences it contains in itself. The art form, given and considered from this side, is the art form of a qualitatively filled space. Of course, every spatial quality is both singular and at rest (or moving). However, we digress from this here and speak only of self-identical difference.

c) Thirdly, we can consider the eidos from the point of view of mobile rest, abstracting from everything else. The art form that arises on the eidos constructed and understood in this way will be the form of qualitatively filled time.

d) Finally, fourthly, we can, moving on to the fourth beginning of the tetractys, talk about the fact that the eidos is hypostasized, (relate) to the eudos as a body, and then we will obviously get a bodily, or, more generally, tectonic, artistic form. - So we get four main types of art form according to its eido-su: verbal, pictorial, musical and tectonic. But some clarifications are needed here.

4. Precisely, between the pure eidos and the fact stands the illogical becoming of the eidos, or, as we said at the beginning, the third moment of the tetractys. He introduces an essentially new structure to the eidos (cf. the table of categories in § 2). It transforms the eidos, as we saw in § 2, into magnitude, space and time. Consequently, what we have just called verbal, pictorial and musical forms is something complex, where, however, the terms include, respectively, the categories of magnitude, spatial and temporal forms. What are these forms and what is obtained by subtracting them from the three main eidetic ones?

(a) What does the principle of pure magnitude mean when applied to verbal form? This means that the verbal form is intense, that it has a different degree of "formality", expressiveness. In other words, here we have in mind a different degree of significance of the illogical content that exists in it. It is clear that in relation to the artistic word, its illogical content, i.e., material that in essence has nothing to do with any poetry, but in this case it is precisely realizing the intended artistry, is the very image (“cup”, “eyes” in the above example from Lermontov). If we want to talk about the illogical intensity of a verbal artistic form, we must single out its external image, a picture that is the bearer of all artistic content. The image in metaphor is its illogical value. This means that in the verbal artistic form we single out bare figurativeness - as also a peculiar form. It, i.e., this principle of figurativeness, may be suitable not only for verbal form, although it is derived from it. There is ugly art, such as pure lyrics or pure music. There is figurative. In figurativeness, it is precisely this singularity, i.e., semantic individuality, that is important, although it is conceived here in an illogical signification. But what happens as a result of subtracting its figurative moment from the integral verbal form? Obviously, the meaning of this form will remain, which, although abstract (after the removal of the image), is marked by this image (for this is the meaning not of that abstract meaning that was just being embodied, but the meaning of precisely the embodied meaning). This semantic, individually semantic, moment will be the remainder in verbal form, which will be obtained when the illogical imagery is removed. So, in the above example from Lermontov, such an abstract meaning would be, approximately, “unaccountable thirst for life”, while without marking the abstract meaning embodied here by the corresponding illogical imagery, we would have an indication simply of the fact of human life, without further details.

b) Further, in the pictorial form, by exactly the same method, a purely spatial form is obtained, obviously consisting only of the relationship of spatial quantities. This is what, filled with more real content, colors, and gives a picturesque form. After turning it off, only a combination of spatial relationships will remain in the pictorial form, which is also a kind of artistic form. Of course, the clean space obtained in this way should have its own, no longer qualitative, but purely spatial design. And here we get the category of symmetry as a form of spatial ordering of pure space, as opposed to the colorfulness and color of its filling.

c) Finally, the same method of alogical commemoration in musical form gives a purely temporal form, e.g. tempo (which by itself is by no means obligatory only for music) and rhythm (which is also not necessarily musical). The complete musical form presupposes that all these seemingly empty forms (rhythm, tempo, etc.) are qualitatively filled, i.e., data in sounds. Like pure space, pure time also contains its own purely temporal design. Separation of moments of pure duration, like the duration and unity of these moments into an independent form, is rhythm. All other designs in this area are already derivative. Therefore, the illogical formation of complete music and the formulation of pure duration as duration gives precisely the rhythmic form, while the filled rhythmic form gives really flowing sounds, i.e., the entire melodic-harmonic element of music.

d) So we have:

a. for pure eidos - taken without illogical filling;

b. for the illogical formation of eidos -

c. for an illogically filled eidos -

5. a) Now, in the light of the developed category of the eidos of the artistic form, the complex nature of the fourth principle of the tetractys, or the fact of hypostasis in form, is also clarified. Namely, in § 2 (see the table of categories) we distinguished in the fourth principle - the “embodiment” of the first principle, which is the specific for it (for the embodiment of the first principle in any category is its specific), from the embodiment in it of the second and third (remember the basic dialectical law: each category bears on itself all the previous ones). Verbal, pictorial and musical forms are obviously the essence of the embodiment of the second in the third. They have nothing to do with the specifics of the fourth principle. What is the tectonic form itself, if it is also understood separately in terms of separate dialectical moments? Here we will have: d. for the illogically become eidos as a pure fact -

1) when the first principle is embodied - an architectural form;

2) with the embodiment of the second beginning - a sculptural form;

3) with the embodiment of the third principle - a kinetic form (any art of movement, for example, dance).

b) Of course, there is a lot to be explained here, but I deal with all this specifically in private aesthetics, and here only bare principles are important to me. I will only note that the last three types of form differ sharply from all the previous ones precisely in that they are based on the category of heaviness, weight, while the previous ones in this sense are some kind of images, more or less weightless, but only visible, audible, understood. This provides them with their exact dialectical localization in the sphere of precisely the other-being-hypostatized eidos, i.e., in the fourth beginning of the tetractys. - It is important to understand for yourself the difference that reigns between them. That the kinetic form of tectonism opposes the other two precisely from the point of view of the formation of gravity is self-evident. The art of movement obviously presupposes time and space first of all, and secondly, it fills these two forms with heaviness and weight. It is obvious. But doubts may arise about the formulation of the dialectical distinction between sculptural and architectural forms. That both are fundamentally related to the sphere of gravity, this, it seems to me, is also obvious. Coloring cannot be considered, for example, essential for statues or buildings, because in painting it is present to a much greater extent, but nevertheless it does not have what is in sculpture and architecture - heaviness and tangible physicality. Figurativeness, figurativeness, etc., etc., cannot be considered essential for statues and buildings. The only thing that other arts do not possess is only corporeality and heaviness. Further, what is the difference between sculptural form and architectural form? To say that the difference here is in terms of material is absurd and strange. To say that people are depicted in one, and the protection of people from atmospheric precipitation in the other is also absurd, because in sculpture one can give features of protection from atmospheric precipitation, and in architecture one can depict a living creature, something like the famous Trojan horse. What is the difference? I see it only in the fact that architecture organizes pure materiality, that is, mass, volume and density, pure facticity and positedness, affirmation. It's not in sculpture. Architecture gives a weight processing of pure materiality, massively-volumetrically-dense space gives space as a force field. Hence, the assignment of the architectural form to the first dialectical category in the general sphere of tectonism, to the category, which, after all, only speaks of pure positing, of pure potency, of the one, which as such is above any design, because it believes, generates this design. In its reflection on the fourth principle, this principle gives, as we saw in § 2, the categories of mass, volume, and density. Architecture is the art of pure mass, pure volume, and pure density, and their various arrangements and combinations. And the most important thing is that we conceived the fourth principle, as we remember, only as a carrier, a container of meaning, in itself not comprehended, but only believing, really affirming the intelligent element of pure meaning. The architectural form, therefore, is always the form of a carrier, a receptacle for something else, more internal. Not because an architectural work is architectural, because it is a dwelling, a temple, etc., but because its dialectical place is in the sphere of pure hypostasis and positedness of meaning, from which it is clear why it is always a container. Sculpture, on the other hand, does not concern itself with space as such, that is, with openness in itself. What is important to her is not the weighty prominence in its qualitative nature, but what exactly is proliferated, those singularities that are proliferated in a weighted way in space. If an architectural work is always a container, then in sculpture we already see what is contained in the body, although not without the body, because otherwise it would be painting, poetry or music. Hence the assignment in my classification of this form to the category of incarnation in the fourth beginning of the second. The second principle, eidos, is precisely the semantic "what" of any incarnation in the sphere of tectonism. - Such is the dialectical structure of the sculptural and architectural form.

6. In order to understand this classification of art forms, it is absolutely necessary to have a very clear idea of ​​all those categories that we dialectically derived earlier, in § 2. Without this, it is impossible to come to an understanding of the true classification of art forms. On the basis of such a dialectical structure, therefore, we obtain such basic types of artistic form.

A verbal art form (“poetry”) is such an art form that, from its eidos as a singularity of the mobile peace of self-identical difference, constructs a specially selected singularity (“existing”, “something”) with all its illogical filling. Hence, it operates with concepts, categories, meanings, judgments, etc.

A pictorial art form is one that constructs from its eidos a specially distinguished self-identical difference with all its illogical filling. Hence - it operates with space and its qualities.

A musical artistic form is one that constructs from its eidos a specially allocated mobile peace with all its illogical filling. Hence - it operates with time and its qualities.

All these three types of artistic form can be given in their meaningful, illogically filled aspect, so to speak, in their qualitative certainty, but they can also be considered in the aspect of pure illogical formation of the corresponding category of eidos. Then we get the following.

A slot-shaped artistic form is one that, out of its eidos, constructs a specially illogical formation of a purely semantic singularity. (That such figurativeness is far from obligatory for any poetry - this has already been said. Compare pure lyrics.).

A purely spatial, or symmetrical, artistic furm is one that, out of its eidos, constructs a specially illogical formation of a purely semantic, self-identical difference. Hence it is the art of pure spatial relations, and symmetry is painting without color.

A purely temporal, or rhythmic, artistic form is one that, out of its eidos, constructs a specially illogical formation of a purely semantic, mobile rest. It is music from which sounds with all their qualities have been removed, and rhythm is music without sounds.

A verbal-semantic artistic form is one that constructs from its eidos a specially pure, illogically unfilled individuality (“existing”, “something”, individual reality).

An optical artistic form is one that constructs from its eidos a specially pure, illogically unfilled, self-identical difference. It can be common to all arts.

An acoustic artistic form is one that, out of its eidos, constructs a specially pure, illogically unfilled mobile peace. It can be common to all arts.

A tectonic, or bodily, artistic form (in a specific sense) is one that constructs its eidos in the form of a fact, or a pure hypostatized given, and a) an architectural form is one that hypostasizes pure positing and containing, sculptural - the one that hypostasizes the eidos, and ©) kinetic - the one that hypostasizes the illogical formation of the eidos.