Центр научного сотрудничества "Интерактив плюс"
info@interactive-plus.ru
+7 (8352) 222-490
2130122532
Центр научного сотрудничества «Интерактив плюс»
RU
428000
Чувашская Республика
г.Чебоксары
ул.Гражданская, д.75
428000, Россия, Чувашская Республика, г. Чебоксары, улица Гражданская, дом 75
+7 (8352) 222-490
RU
428000
Чувашская Республика
г.Чебоксары
ул.Гражданская, д.75
56.125001
47.208966

Vladimir Soloviev on the Mission of Art: The Modern Aspects

Research Article
DOI: 10.21661/r-530868
Open Access
Monthly international scientific journal «Interactive science»
Creative commons logo
Published in:
Monthly international scientific journal «Interactive science»
Author:
Erofeeva K. L. 1
Work direction:
Тема номера
Rating:
Article accesses:
1741
Published in:
eLibrary.ru
Cited by:
1 articles
1 FSBEI of HE "Ivanovo State Power University named after V.I. Lenin"
For citation:
Erofeeva K. L. (2020). Vladimir Soloviev on the Mission of Art: The Modern Aspects. Interactive science, 11-17. https://doi.org/10.21661/r-530868

  • Metadata
  • Full text
  • Metrics
  • Cited by
UDC 130.3

Abstract

The article analyses the final lines of V. Soloviev’s work “The General Sense of Art,” correlating them with the art tendencies of the modern civilization. The author addresses Soloviev’s idea about the transforming role of art in relation to the reality, the real life. It is stated that, in the modern era, within the commercial mass culture domination, the entertaining function of art comes to the forefront. At the same time, an opposing tendency can be observed: a movement towards the all-encompassing unity, understanding of the universal, the priority of common values (the ideas of ecological ethics, common religion, non-violence). The author indicates that the dialectic negation of the negation law is manifested in the history of art, in the realization of its varied functions.

References

  1. 1. Baudrillard, J. (2001). Sistema veshchei., 220. M.: Rudomino.
  2. 2. Borev, Iu. B. (2002). Estetika., 511. M.: Vysshaia shkola.
  3. 3. Bychkov, V. V. (2006). Sofiologiia kak osnova teurgicheskoi estetiki. Solov'evskie issledovaniia, Vyp. 13, 44-71.
  4. 4. Bychkov, V. V. (2006). Esteticheskii opyt Rossii na rubezhe tysiacheletii. Estetika: Vchera. Segodnia. Vsegda, Vyp.2, 3-30. M.: IF RAN.
  5. 5. Bychkov, V. V. Estetika. Retrieved from http://iknigi.net/avtor-viktor-bychkov/2051-estetika-viktor-bychkov.html
  6. 6. Bychkov, V. V. (2018). O dukhovnosti v iskusstve. Voprosy filosofii, 5, 76-87.
  7. 7. Erofeeva, K. L. K voprosu ob ontologicheskom statuse zla (Kategoriia tragicheskogo i ee interpretatsii v sovremennom iskusstve). Vestnik Ivanovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriia "Gumanitarnye nauki". 2018, Vyp. 2 (18), 10.
  8. 8. Ivanova, E. V. (2006). Vladimir Solov'ev i formirovanie russkoi religiozno-filosofskoi estetiki. Solov'evskie issledovaniia, Vyp. 12, 5.
  9. 9. Kormin, N. A. (2001). Filosofskaia estetika Vladimira Solov'eva. Ch. 1., 187. M.: IFRAN.
  10. 10. Lialinskaia, M. Chto takoe immersivnyi teatr?. Retrieved from http://www.timeout.ru/msk/feature/465269
  11. 11. Marcuse, H. Odnomernyi chelovek. Retrieved from https://www.litmir.me/br/?b=93011&p=8
  12. 12. Mitroshenkov, O. A. (2005). Prostranstvo rossiiskoi dukhovnoi kul'tury: ispytanie peremenami. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, 11, 37-46.
  13. 13. Solov'ev, V. S. (1998). Obshchii smysl iskusstva. Soch. v 2 t, T. 2, 390-404. M.
  14. 14. Fromm, E. (1990). Imet' ili byt'. M.: Progress.
  15. 15. Shelkovaia, N. V. (2016). Religiia kak zhivoi organizm. Filosofskie nauki, 12, 132-138.
  16. 16. Er'iavets, A. (1998). Postmodernizm i khudozhestvennyi avangard. KorneviShche: Kniga neklassicheskoi estetiki, 270. M.: IF RAN.
  17. 17. Hume, D. (1967). O tragedii. Voprosy literatury, 2, 155-167.
  18. 18. Sergeev, M. (2015). Theory of Religious Cycles: Tradition, Modernity and the Baha'i Faith. Leiden: Brill.

Comments(0)

When adding a comment stipulate:
  • the relevance of the published material;
  • general estimation (originality and relevance of the topic, completeness, depth, comprehensiveness of topic disclosure, consistency, coherence, evidence, structural ordering, nature and the accuracy of the examples, illustrative material, the credibility of the conclusions;
  • disadvantages, shortcomings;
  • questions and wishes to author.