مناسبات اسطوره و هنر در تفکر ارنست کاسیرر، والتربنیامین و تئودورآدورنو (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
هنگامی که در نیمه نخست قرن بیستم بحث از لغزش عقل مدرن شد، اسطوره شناسی به شکلی جدّی مورد توجه قرار گرفت. تعاریف متنوعی برای اسطوره از سوی اسطوره شناسان و حتی برخی فلاسفه مطرح شد. دامنه ی این اسطوره شناسی ها در سال های پس از آن، به گستره ی نقد ادبی نیز کشیده شد و ترجیحات کارکردگرایانه ی متفاوتی در هنرها پدیدار شدند که از همین جریانات نشأت می گرفتند. ازجمله برخی از اعضای مکتب «فرانکفورت» همچون تئودور آدورنو، رویکردشان به نقد خردگراییِ پدید آمده در عصر روشنگری بود. در سوی دیگر، ارنست کاسیرر از طریق «فلسفه ی انتقادی» به ویژه تلاش کرد جایگاه اسطوره را از سایر صورت های سمبلیک همچون زبان و هنر، خودبسنده و مستقل تعریف کند. در بررسی آرای کاسیرر، آدورنو و نیز والتر بنیامین- با وجود تمایزات فکری ایشان در باب مناسبات میان اسطوره و هنر- به نظر می رسد آن چه که می تواند مرور عوالم گوناگون فکری ایشان را در کنار هم توجیه کند، اولاً: تمرکز و عزمی است که این اندیشمندان برای شناساندن و کنترل اسطوره همچون قدرتی تأثیرذار بر افکار بشر به خرج دادند. درثانی، شرایط اجتماعی و سیاسی تقریباً مشترکی است که ایشان در آلمان جنگ های جهانی و سال های پس از آن تجربه نمودند. در این مقاله مناسباتی که متأثر از رویکرد متفکران مورد نظر به اسطوره، میان اسطوره و هنر ترسیم شد، از تطبیق آرای ایشان مورد تحلیل قرار گرفته است.Relationship of Myth & Art in thought of Ernst Cassirer, Walter Benjamin & Theodor Adorno
In the first half ofthe20 century, when discussions focused on the Modern mind slipping, the mythology was seriously considered more and more. Mythologists and philosophers explain various definitions of myth where the domain of mythology was extended in criticism. As a matter of fact, different functional preferences, that emanating from these trends for art were appeared. Some of the members of "Frankfurt" school –like Theodor Adorno by the critical theory– have the approach of "rationalism" critic that had been emerged on Enlightenment period. On the other hand, Ernst Cassirer attempted to define a self-sufficient and independent position for myth through a "critical philosophy", like other symbolic forms; language and art. Of course there are many differentiations in thinking of Ernst Cassirer, Walter Benjamin and Theodor Adorno on relationships between myth and art. These separations in theories about mythologies are from many causes. For example, Cassirer, who was from Marburg school, has a neo- Kantianism disposition and he decided to establish another Copernican revolution, while Adorno and Walter Benjamin were in different philosophical tendencies. Marxism was the main question in Frankfort school that was usually discussed between Adorno, Max Hurkhaymer, Benjamin and some other members of Frankfort school. Then dominated other mythologies emphasize in each of thought of these thinkers, and it can be so hard to compare and give an exact conclusion through these varieties. But at least, there are two main similarities to solve these diversities for start a useful research. The issue of this article seems can be justifiable by tow pretext for study: First one is the centralization of our thinkers and their purpose for identity and rein of myth that like an effective power. In the other words despite of their various manners to represent a whole aspect of myth especially in modern period, Cassirer, Adorno and Benjamin, have a synonym definition of myth that was so absolute. Second same source to survey these thinkers together is their similar situation in the world wars. They were influenced of every event that progressively made a specified aim. At finally appears throughout these collations an important confliction in definition of myth and art works. By mythology of Ernest Cassirer, there is no way to prevention of myth procreations, and also he believed that we can just with philosophy aware of its power on human’s mind. Then there is no advice for how making art works and relationships are clear. In the other hand, there is a mistake against myth. Frankfort school members continued their mythologies to making myth level and they inevitably perverse to aesthetic and beginning of art work. Although they have Marxism trends, but there were other interpretation of Marx in Frankfort school that began Adorno and Benjamin debate son myth, art and new art media. In fact, the primary source of Adorno and Benjamin on their discussions was in their different interpretation of Marxism. Identity of myth and art has many consequences that appeared in criticism and POP art.
تبلیغات
