Art as a Social Institution

  • Viktor O. Pigulevskiy South Russian Humanitarian Institute, Rostov-on-Don urgi@urgi.info
  • Lyudmila A. Mirskaya South Russian Humanitarian Institute, Rostov-on-Don urgi@urgi.info
How to Cite
Pigulevskiy V.O., Mirskaya L.A. Art as a Social Institution. Humanities of the South of Russia. 2019. Vol. 8. No. 4. P. 167-177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23683/2227-8656.2019.4.18 (in Russ.).

Abstract

Art as a social institution is the traditional structure of the social roles of the artist, critic, spectator about the work of art placed in a museum, theater, concert hall. In the conditions of the information society, the social structure of aesthetic activity becomes mobile - the function of the creation can be performed by the public itself, the role of the artist, director or composer can be played by a layman, the context of the work can be made up of the environment and the mass - media. The status of the work can be obtained by the object, construction or action by eliminating the signifying and new signification of the artifact or performance due to the sign-symbolic context of culture. Construction, manipulation or action, that have the character of provocation, violating socio-cultural taboos, become an impulse of creativity, understood as a mobile social structure with a negative center. The meaning of cultural pretence in the postmodern situation is the search for identification by people, the development of a new social interest.
Keywords:
art, artifact, work, institution, social role, social structure

Author Biographies

Viktor O. Pigulevskiy, South Russian Humanitarian Institute, Rostov-on-Don
Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Professor, Rector of South Russian Humanitarian Institute,Rostov-on-Don
Lyudmila A. Mirskaya, South Russian Humanitarian Institute, Rostov-on-Don
Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Professor, Prorector

References

Abercomby, N., Hill, S., Turner, B. (1997). Sociological Dictionary. Kazan.



Arendt, H. (2000). Vita activa, or on an active life. SPb.



Bataille, G. (1999). Impossible. Hatred of poetry. M.



Binkley, T. (1997). Against aesthetics. Amerikanskaya filosofiya iskusstva. Ekaterinburg; Bishkek.



Baudrillard, G. (2017). Fatal strategies. M.



Danto, A. (1988). Language, art and culture. Obshchestvo i kul'tura. Part 2. M.



Deleuze, G. (1995). The logic of meaning. M.



Dickey, D. (1997). Defining Art. Amerikanskaya filosofiya iskusstva. Ekaterinburg; Bishkek.



Ionin, L.G. (2004). Sociology of culture. M.



Lyotard, J.F. (1994). The answer to the question: what is postmodern? Stupeni, 2. (in Russian).



Lukshin, I. (1984). Art as a social institution. M.



Prozersky, V. (2013). Institutionalism: Radical reorientation of aesthetics. Ocherki estetiki i filosofii iskusstva. M.



Saleles, R. (2001). Silence of female pleasure. Kabinet: Kartiny mira. II. SPb.



Tzara, T. (2000). Manifest Dada 1918. Al'manakh dada. M.



Tzara, T. (2002). Proclamation without claim. Dadaizm. Teksty, illyustratsii, dokumenty. M.



Fischer-Lichte, E. (2015). Aesthetics of performativity. M.



Foucault, M. (1996). What is an author? The will to truth. M.



Hart, K. (2006). Postmodernism. M.



Khrenov, N.A. (2013). Aesthetics as a sociology of art. Ocherki estetiki i filosofii iskusstva. M.



Eaton, M.M. (1983). Art and Nonart. Cranbury. N.Y., 99-104.



Margolis, J. (1975). Works of Art as Physically Embodied and Culturally Emergent Entities. The British Journal of Aesthetics, 15.
Citation Formats
Other cite formats:

APA
Pigulevskiy, V. O., & Mirskaya, L. A. (2019). Art as a Social Institution. Humanities of the South of Russia, 8(4), 167-177. https://doi.org/10.23683/2227-8656.2019.4.18
Section
CULTURE AND GLOBALIZATION