This study is a critical reflection on the everyday through interpreting an artwork (Ye Habe Ghand), based on this argument that any artwork, just like the everyday, is a construction of elements and fragments. The everyday as a thread conjoining all the things, events and interactions in which we experience our personal and social life, represents and dominate itself as a natural phenomenon on subjective and objective being of people. Artwork defamiliarize this natural everydayness. The approach used here to interpret Ye Habe Ghand is neoformalism. This approach assumes that the best way to interpret the devices, techniques and functional elements of a film is through relating them to the social and historical backgrounds of the text. So, in this research, in inferring the referential, explicit, implicit and symptomatic meanings of Ye Habe Ghand, the main emphasis has been on the everyday and artistic backgrounds. The findings show that this film is a dialectical image of intertwinement/opposition of the everyday and event. The same event that overthrows the everyday is itself an integral part of it. The event (death, here) is engraved on the everyday. So, a piece of candy which is supposed to be delicious, embitter the taste of everyone. The everyday is the main source of anything and events; nothing exists beyond it.
انگلیس، دیوید (1395). «جامعهشناسی هنر: بین بدبینی و بازاندیشی». در جامعهشناسی هنر، ویراستۀ دیوید انگلیس و جان هاگسون، ترجمة جمال محمدی، تهران، نشر نی.
دو وینیو، ژان (1388). جامعهشناسی هنر، ترجمۀ مهدی سحابی، تهران، نشر مرکز.
لینتُن، نوربرت (1386). هنر مدرن، ترجمۀ علی رامین، تهران، نشر نی.
نیلقاز، نسیم (1390). «نقاشی رئالیستی معاصر در ایران و شرایط اجتماعی ظهور آن (1376-1388)». جامعهشناسی هنر و ادبیات، سال سوم، شمارة اول، صص 35-71.
هِپوُرث، مایک (1395). «طراحی سالمندی: دیدگاههای جامعهشناختی دربارۀ سالمندی در نقاشی عصر ویکتوریا»، در جامعهشناسی هنر، ویراستۀ دیوید انگلیس و جان هاگسون، ترجمة جمال محمدی، تهران، نشر نی.
Bakhtin, M. (1993), Toward a Philosophy of the Act, V. Liapunov (Trans), Austin: Texas University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1992[1979]) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, Landon: Routledge.
Crook, S. (1998), “Minotaurs and Other Monsters: Everyday Life”, in Recent Social Theory, Sociology, 32 (2): 529.
Gardiner, M. (2000), Critiques of Everyday Life, London: Routledge.
Kerman, J. (1985) Musicology, London: Fontana Books.
Highmore, B. (2002), Everyday Life and Cultural Theory: An Introduction, London and New York: Routledge.
Lefebvre, H. (1971), Everyday Life in the Modern World, New York, London: Harper Torch Books.
Lefebvre, H. (1991), The Structure of Marx’s Worldview, New jersey, Princeton University Press.
Shklovsky, V. (1998), “Art as Technique”, in Julie Rivkin and Michael Rayan (eds) (1998) Literary theory: an Anthology, Malden, MA, and Oxford: Blackwell (1917).
Simmel, G. (1971), “The Adventurer”, in D. Levine (ed), George Simmel on Individuality and Social Forms. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Mohamaddi, J. (2017). Ye Habe Ghand: Recreation of the Dialectic of Event/Everydayness in Social Life. Sociology of Art and Literature, 8(2), 1-23. doi: 10.22059/jsal.2017.62252
MLA
Jamal Mohamaddi. "Ye Habe Ghand: Recreation of the Dialectic of Event/Everydayness in Social Life", Sociology of Art and Literature, 8, 2, 2017, 1-23. doi: 10.22059/jsal.2017.62252
HARVARD
Mohamaddi, J. (2017). 'Ye Habe Ghand: Recreation of the Dialectic of Event/Everydayness in Social Life', Sociology of Art and Literature, 8(2), pp. 1-23. doi: 10.22059/jsal.2017.62252
VANCOUVER
Mohamaddi, J. Ye Habe Ghand: Recreation of the Dialectic of Event/Everydayness in Social Life. Sociology of Art and Literature, 2017; 8(2): 1-23. doi: 10.22059/jsal.2017.62252
)