Norman Bryson's approach to painting as social practic and cultural sign

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD. student of Art research/ Art university of Isfahan

2 Art university of Isfahan

10.22059/jsal.2025.369540.666290

Abstract

William Norman Bryson is one of the second-generation cultural studies researchers who is concerned with revising the concept of art history. Focusing on the discussion of the image and its analysis, while criticizing the classic sociological and semiotic methodologies in the criticism of the image, he presents painting as a social practice and a cultural sign. In his opinion, if the painting analysis method is revised, the dimensions A wider scope of painting is opened and the nature of painting is clarified as a social practice or a cultural sign, which really makes painting a social formation, and from this point of view, the nature of art history itself is also revised. According to Bryson, the denotation process of painting is a kind of active production, and it appears from the heart of social interactions, and at the same time, it embodies social conflicts, and painting is a cultural being. The main question of the upcoming article is to explain Bryson's point of view on painting as a social practice and a cultural sign. From this point of view, painting is understood as a work intertwined with social formation, which shows some agency on the part of the painter. The action painting has a sign and implication, which, along with its impact on social conditions, plays an active role in the way these conditions are expressed, and even actively enters into the change of cultural approaches. The research method of this article is descriptive-analytical with a critical approach, which while describing Bryson's point of view, presents his critical analysis of classic sociological and semiotic analysis methods to painting as a result, painting as a social practice and cultural sign.

Keywords

References

برایسون، نورمن(۱۳۹۹). نگاه و نقاشی؛ منطق نگاه خیره ، ترجمه‌ی مهدی حبیب‌زاده، تهران: نشر حرفه نویسنده.
برتنز، یوهانس ویلم(۱۳۹۶). نظریه ادبی:مقدمات، ترجمه: فرزان سجودی، تهران: نشر علم.
پورزین، رضا(۱۳۹۲).مطالعه تطبیقی نشانه های بصری در آینه کاری ایرانی و نقاشی اُپ آرت، مجله نگره: شماره ۲۷، صص ۷۵-۸۸.
رز، ژیلیان(۱۳۹۷). روش و روش شناسی تحلیل تصویر، ترجمه سید جمال الدین اکبرزاده جهرمی، تهران: پژوهشگاه فرهنگ، هنر و ارتباطات/ مرکز پژوهش و سنجش افکار صدا و سیما.
صادقی، علی‌اکبر (۱۳۷۲). خاطره ها: نقاشی‌های آبرنگ، تهران: نشر گویا.
مجابی، جواد (۱۳۷۷). برگزیده آثار علی‌اکبر صادقی از ۱۳۵۶ تا ۱۳۷۶، به کوشش منیژه میرعمادی، تهران: نشر هنر ایران.
Bryson, Norman (1991).  Semiotics and Art History.  The Art Bulletin, Vol. 73, No. 2 (Jun., 1991), pp. 174-208Published by: College Art Association.
Bryson, Norman (2001). Text of still life, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Winter, 1989), pp. 227-252Published by: The University of Chicago Press.
Bryson, Norman (1998). Intertextuality and visual poetics, Style, Vol 22, No.2, pp183-193.
Sociology of Art and Literature
Volume 16, Issue 2
Autumn & winter 2025
July 2025
Pages 55-68

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics