Anthropology of Art: Questions of Theory

10.33876/2311-0546/2024-4/217-235

Authors

Keywords:

anthropology of art, anthrope/man and regional and national art, canon-morpheme, cultural archetype

Abstract

The article presents preliminary interdisciplinary criteria for understanding the subject field of art in the interaction between anthropology and art studies. It is important to highlight the methodological approach adopted in the comprehensive analysis of artistic content in relation to different geographical regions. It is crucial that scholars from diverse scientific disciplines engage in the theoretical comprehension of the Russian cultural field. The authors posit that the distinctive and particular content of the anthropology of art resides in the circumstances of culture, which may be understood in three dimensions: sacral/ethno-national-religious, socio-organisational, and nature-production. These dimensions may be conceived as parts of the "matrix of being," which is essential for scientific comprehension of the object and subjects of the discussed scientific direction. There is currently no agreed scientific or practical substantiation for the anthropological nature of art in its ethnic understanding. The systematic classification of factors of production, social and religious modes of life within the cultural context of diverse peoples, in conjunction with historical periodization, enables the introduction of a typological dimension that is characteristic of ethnic art. Accordingly, the anthropological/ethnocultural aspect of art should be examined in the context of the causal relations between the material and spiritual purpose of the 'thing' (human-function-form). It is important to engage in interdisciplinary dialogue on this topic, but it is essential to reach a consensus on the categories of subject matter and the conditions for their formulation.

Author Biographies

  • Vladimir Koshaev, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University

    Koshaev, Vladimir B. — Doctor in Art, Professor, M. Lomonosov Moscow State University (Moscow, Russian Federation). E-mail: koshaev@gmail.com ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5211-5254

  • Liudmila Missonova, the Russian Academy of Sciences N. N. Miklouho-Maklay Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology

    Missonova, Liudmila I. — Ph.D. of Historical Sciences, Leading Researcher, the Russian Academy of Sciences N. N. Miklouho-Maklay Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology (Moscow, Russian Federation). E-mail: missmila@iea.ras.ru ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7376-3434

    For citation: Koshaev, V. B. and L. I. Missonova. 2024. Anthropology of Art: Questions of Theory. Herald of Anthropology (Vestnik Antropologii) 4: 217–235.

    References
    1. Averintsev, S. S. 2006. K uiasneniiu smysla nadpisi nad konkhoi tsentral’noi apsidy Sofii Kievskoi [To Clarify the Meaning of the Inscription Above the Conch of the Central Apse of St. Sophia of Kiev]. In Sofiya-Logos: slovar’ [Sofiya-Logos: Dictionary], by S. S. Averintsev. Kiev: Dukh i litera. 25–49.
    2. Bakshtein, I. M., E. V. Barabanov, V. V. Bychkov, N. B. Mankovskaia, E. V. Petrovskaia, V. A. Podoroga, and Ya. Krotov. 2016. Chto takoe iskusstvo? [What is Art?]. Filosofskii zhurnal 9(4): 18–47. https://doi.org/10.21146/2072-0726-2016-9-4-18-47
    3. Danilevskii, N. Ya. 1991. Rossiia i Evropa. [Russia and Europe]. Moscow: Kniga. 574 p.
    4. Darenskii, V. Yu. 2020. N. Ya. Danilevskii kak khudozhestvennyi kritik [N. Ya. Danilevsky as Art Critic]. Tetradi po konservatizmu: Al’manakh 3: 366–378. http://dx.doi.org/10.24030/24092517-2020-0-3-366-378
    5. Filosofskii entsiklopedicheskii slovar’ [Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary]. 2010. http://philosophy.niv.ru/doc/dictionary/philosophy/fc/slovar-192-2.htm#zag-352
    6. Gorbunova, T. V. 1995. Izobrazitel’noe iskusstvo v kontekste kul’tury. Istoriko-kul’turologicheskii analiz. [Visual Art in the Context of Culture. Historical and Cultural Analysis]. Dr. diss. abstract, Saint Petersburg State University. 31 p.
    7. Gritsanov, A. A. 1999. Epistemologiia [Epistemology]. In Noveishii filosofskii slovar’ [The Latest Philosophical Dictionary], ed. by A.A. Gritsanov. Minsk: Knizhnyi Dom. 877 p. http://philoso- phy.niv.ru/doc/dictionary/newest-dictionary/articles/622/epistemologiya.htm
    8. Hegel, G. W. F. 1929. Sochineniia. [Essays.] Vol. 1. Moscow-Leningrad: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo politicheskoi literaturi. 473 p.
    9. Iliichiov, L. F. (ed.), P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, and V. G. Panov. 1983. Obshchestvennoe bytie i obshchestvennoe soznanie [Social Being and Social Consciousness]. In Filosofskii enciklopedicheskii slovar’ [Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary]. Moscow: Sovetskaia enciklopediia. 840 p. https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_philosophy/4611/ОБЩЕСТВЕННОЕ
    10. Ivanov, S. V. 1963. Ornament narodov Sibiri kak istoricheskii istochnik (po materialam XIX — nachala XX v.). Narody Severa i Dal’nego Vostoka [The Ornament of the Peoples of Siberia as a Historical Source (Based on the Materials of the XIX — early XX Centuries). Peoples of the North and the Far East]. In Trudy Instituta etnografii. Novaia seriia [Proceedings of the Institute of Ethnography. New Series]. Vol 81. Moscow-Leningrad: Nauka. 500 p.
    11. Ivin, A. A. (ed.). 2004. Filosofiia: Entsiklopedicheskii slovar’. [Philosophy: An Encyclopedic Dictionary]. Moscow: Gardariki. 1072 p.
    12. Kant, I. 1964. Sochineniia [Essays]. Vol. 3. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Misl’. 799 p.
    13. Kasavin, I. T. (ed.). 2009. Entsiklopediia epistemologii i filosofii nauki [Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science]. Moscow: Kanon+. 1247 p.
    14. Kont-Sponvil, A. 2012. Filosofskii slovar’ [Philosophical Dictionary]. Moscow: Eterna; Palimsest. 750 p.
    15. Koshaev, V. B. 2009. Tipologiia khudozhestvennoi kul’tury i obraznoe miromodelirovanie v iskusstve [Typology of Artistic Culture and Figurative World Modeling in Art]. In Materialy konferentsii, nauchnoi vystavki, fotovystavki “Miromodelirovanie: gumanitarnye i khudozhestvennye protsessy v obshchestvennoi zhizni’ [Materials of Conference, Scientific Exhibition, Photo Exhibition “World Modeling: Humanitarian and Artistic Processes in Public Life”], ed. by V. B. Koshaev. Izhevsk: Udmurt State University. 11–30.
    16. Koshaev, V. B. 2012. Tipologiia avangarda [Typology of the Avant-garde]. In Nauchnye trudy. VII Mezhdunarodnaia nauchno-prakticheskaia konferentsiia “Rol’ dizaina i iskusstva v kul’ture, nauke i obrazovanii XXI veka’ [Scientific works. VII International Scientific and Practical Conference “The Role of Design and Art in the Culture, Science and Education of the XXI century”]. Vol. 9. Moscow: NOU VPO MGTA. 62–81.
    17. Koshaev, V. B. 2020. Tipologiia iskusstva [The Typology of Art]. Teoriia i istoriia iskusstva 3/4: 44–74.
    18. Losev, A. F. 2001. Dialektika mifa [The Dialectic of Myth]. Moscow: Misl’. 558 p.
    19. Missonova, L. I. 2013. Mnogomernost’ prostranstva v mirovozzrenii i iskusstve tunguso-man’chzhurskoi malochislennoi etnicheskoi obshchnosti ostrova Sakhalin [The Multidimensionality of Space in the Worldview and Art of the Tunguso-Manchurian Small Ethnic Community of Sakhalin Island]. Arkheologiia, etnografiia i antropologiia Evrazii 1(53): 121–130.
    20. Myreeva, A. N. (ed.). 2013. Dulin buga Torgandunin = Torgandun srednego mira [Torgandun of the Middle World]. In Pamyatniki etnicheskoi kul’tury korennykh malochislennykh narodov Severa, Sibiri i Dal’nego Vostoka [Monuments of the Ethnic Culture of the Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East]. Vol. 31. Novosibirsk: Nauka. 856 p.
    21. Napolskikh, V. V. 1990. Mif o vozniknovenii zemli v praural’skoi kosmogonii: rekonstruktsiia, paralleli, evoliutsiia [The Myth of the Origin of the Earth in the Proto-Ural Cosmogony: Reconstruction, Parallels, Evolution]. Sovetskaia etnografiia 1: 65–74.
    22. Nikolaev, N. N. and D. Yu. Guk. 2021. Zabytaia nakhodka iz piatogo Pazyrykskogo kurgana [A Forgotten Find from the Fifth Pazyryk Mound]. Kunstkamera 3 (13): 168–183. https://doi.org/10.31250/2618-8619-2021-3(13)-168-183
    23. Prokofiev, V. N. 1985. Khudozhestvennaia kritika — istoriia iskusstva — teoriia obshchego khudozhestvennogo protsessa: ikh spetsifika i problemy vzaimodeistviia v predelakh iskusstvovedeniia [Art Criticism — History of Art — Theory of the General Artistic Process: Their Specifics and Problems of Interaction Within the Limits of Art Criticism]. In Ob iskusstve i iskusstvoznanii. Stat’i raznykh let [On Art and Art History. Articles of Different Years], by V. N. Prokofiev. Moscow: Sovetskii khudoznik. 266–279.
    24. Rozhdestvenskii, Yu. V. 1996. Obshchaia filologiia [General Philology]. Moscow: Fond “Novoe tysiacheletie “. 325 р.
    25. Rozhdestvenskii, Yu. V. 2003. Filosofiia yazyka. Kul’turovedenie i didaktika. [The Philosophy of Language. Cultural Studies and Didactics]. Moscow: Grant. 240 p.
    26. Rybakov, B. A. 1972. Proiskhozhdenie i semantika rombicheskogo ornamenta [The Origin and Semantics of the Rhombic Ornament]. In Sbornik trudov Nauchno-issledovatel’skogo instituta khudozhestvennoi promyshlennosti [Collection of Works of the Scientific Research Institute of the Art Industry], ed. by L. K. Rozova. Moscow: Gosmestpromizdat. 127–134.
    27. Sharonov, A. M. 2020. Mastorava [Mastorava]. Saransk: Publishing house of Mordovian University. 500 p.
    28. Shchepkin, V. V. 2022. Ainy glazami yapontsev: neizvestnaia kollektsiia A.V. Grigor’eva. [Ainu through the Eyes of the Japanese: The Unknown Collection of A.V. Grigoriev.]. Saint Petersburg: Arka. 302 р.
    29. Shmit, F. I. 2012. Izbrannoe. Iskusstvo: Problemy teorii i istorii. (Seriia Rossiiskie propilei). [Favourites. Art: Problems of Theory and History. The Russian Propylaea Series]. Saint Petersburg: Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ. 312 p.
    30. Spengler, O. A. G. 1993. Zakat Evropy [The Decline of Europe]. Moscow: Nauka, 592 p.
    31. Toynbee, A. J. 1991. Postizhenie istorii [Comprehension of History]. Moscow: Progress. 730 p.
    32. Varlamova, G. I. 1996. Epicheskie traditsii v evenkiiskom fol’klore. [Epic Traditions in Evenk Folklore]. Yakutsk: Severoved. 134 p.
    33. Yamaeva, E. E. 2021. Mifologicheskie osnovy altaiskogo eposa. Motiv “Chelovek-ptitsa protiv Odnoglazovogo vraga’: v kontekste interpretatsii materialov pazyrykskoi kul’tury [The Mythological Foundations of the Altai Epic. The Motif “The Bird-Man Against the One- eyed Enemy”: in the Context of the Interpretation of the Materials of the Pazyryk Culture]. Kunstkamera 3 (13): 184–193. https://doi.org/10.31250/2618-8619-2021-3(13)-184-193
    34. Zelenskii, V. V. 2008. Tolkovyi slovar’ po analiticheskoi psikhologii. [Explanatory Dictionary of Analytical Psychology]. Moscow: Kogito-Centr, 336 p.
    35. Zubova, T. D. 1977. Izuchenie narodnogo iskusstva v 20–30-kh gg. (V. S. Voronov, A. I. Nekrasov, A. V. Bakushinskii) [Study of Folk Art in the 20–30s (V. S. Voronov, A. I. Nekrasov, A. V. Bakushinsky)]. Ph.d. diss., Moscow State University.

Downloads

Published

22.12.2024

Issue

No. 4 (2024): Herald of Anthropology

Section

The Anthropology of Art