PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMBOL OF THE FACADE, INTERIOR, COSTUME

PLAN

1. Introduction
   a) character definition
   b) style definition
2. Symbols of architecture
   a) Antica
   b) Gothic
   c) Baroque
   d) Modern
3. Interior symbolism
   a) color symbolism
   b) the symbolism of the form
   c) design
   d) ornament
4. Costume symbolism
   a) psychological characteristics of the costume
   b) costume as a characteristic of time
   c) social characteristics of the costume
   d) costume and technical progress
   e) attributes and accessories
   e) color in a suit
   g) costume as a symbol
   h) costume - a manifestation of the style of the era
   i) fashion
5. Conclusion

"It may seem that art
in danger of drowning
in a sea of ​​talk about him. "
Rudolf Arnheim

INTRODUCTION

When the main core of the text of the essay was already completed, I came across the newspaper "Evening Moscow" with an extensive interview published in it by the Chief Architect of Moscow. Some of the provisions of this article seemed to me so directly related to the topic of our analysis that I decided to start my work with one of them.
The journalist and interviewer describes, in particular, an amazing sketch of life: a modern boy stands on Poklonnaya Hill, looking at the temple — a remake — his freshly glittering golden domes, slender apses, snow-white-boiled vaults, the bright faces of saints. - Like? - asks his young mother. - Highly! - the son answers.
- It looks like a bank!
This story of the substitution of the house of God for the house of money changers seems to me to be the brightest and extraordinarily accurate example of the inversion, the shift of the psychological symbolism of our current visual perception.
A bad book can be slammed. From the bad picture - turn away. From a bad concert or performance - leave. But there is a group of arts that influence people constantly and independently of their desires. They are included in the concept of material culture and are associated with the formation of the spatial environment and the objective world. Meeting with them can not be avoided, they can not close your eyes. We encounter them daily and hourly, and just as daily and hourly, human psychology interacts with them directly, continuously influencing them and receiving from them the strongest influence. These arts are architecture, design and costume.
But before I actually dealt with each of them individually, I had to refer to reference books in order to understand more precisely what the concept of a symbol includes.
A symbol in art (from the Greek. Symbolon is a sign, an identifying mark), a universal aesthetic category, revealed through comparison with adjacent categories - an artistic image, on the one hand, a sign and an allegory - on the other. In a broad sense, one can say that a symbol is an image taken in the aspect of its significance, and that it is a sign endowed with all the organicity and inexhaustible polysemy of the image. Every symbol is an image (and every image is, at least to some extent, a symbol); but the category of the symbol indicates the appearance of the image beyond its own limits, the presence of a certain meaning, indivisibly merged with the image, but not identical to it. The objective image and the deep meaning appear in the structure of the symbol as two poles, inconceivable one without the other (for meaning loses its appearance outside the image, and the image is spreading out of meaning into its components), but divorced from each other, so that the tension between them is revealed symbol. Turning into a symbol, the image becomes "transparent"; meaning "shines through" through it, being given precisely as a semantic depth, a semantic perspective.
The fundamental difference between a symbol and an allegory is that the meaning cannot be deciphered by a simple effort of reason, it is inseparable from the structure of the image, does not exist as a rational formula that can be “nested” in the image and then extracted from it. Here we have to look for the specific character of the symbol in relation to the category of the sign. The very structure of the symbol is aimed at giving through each particular phenomenon a complete image of the world.
The semantic structure of the symbol is multi-layered and designed for the active inner workings of the perceiver. The meaning of a symbol objectively performs itself not as cash, but as a dynamic tendency: it is not given, but given. Strictly speaking, this meaning cannot be clarified by reducing it to an unambiguous logical formula, but can only be explained by correlating it with further, symbolic couplings, which will lead to greater rational clarity, but will not achieve pure concepts.
The interpretation of a symbol is a dialogical form of knowledge: the meaning of a symbol really exists only within human communication. In general psychology, the category of the character was developed in detail in psychoanalysis and interactionism. For orthodox psychoanalysis, the interpretation of symbols as unconscious images that determine the structure and functioning of human mental processes is characteristic. Subsequently, in psychoanalysis, the center of gravity was transferred to the analysis and interpretation of symbols of social and historical origin. So, in the depth psychology of K.G. Jung, who rejected the identification of a symbol with a psychological symptom by Z. Freud, the entire wealth of human symbolism was interpreted as an expression of the stable figures of the unconscious. He introduced the term collective unconscious (a reflection of the experience of previous generations), embodied in archetypes
- universal prototypes. Archetypes are not available to direct observation, they are revealed only indirectly - through their projection on external objects, which is manifested in universal human symbolism: myths, beliefs, works of art. In interactionism (from the English. Interaction - interaction, influence on each other), a common direction of modern Western social psychology, based on the works of the American sociologist and psychologist J. Mead, social - psychological processes and phenomena are reduced to the influence of people on each other. The essence, origin and development of interpersonal relations are interpreted in it as direct communication (understood here as the exchange of symbols).
Thus, all of the above leads us to the conclusion that the socio-historical nature of the psychological symbolism of mankind in the field of art and culture can be most fully expressed only in the aesthetic category of style.
To more accurately understand the definition of this concept, we will again have to refer to some reference books.
Style in architecture and art (from the Latin. Stilus - a pointed stick for writing, manner of writing) - a set of features inherent in any era, school or artist;
- ideologically and artistically conditioned community of visual techniques in literature and in art of a specific time or direction, as well as in a separate work;
- the way of accomplishing something, which is distinguished by a combination of peculiar methods;
- a stable generality of the imaginative system, means of artistic expression, characterizing the originality of the artist’s work, a separate work, artistic direction, national culture;
- difference of style from other categories of aesthetics, in particular, artistic method,
- in its concrete implementation: the stylistic features seem to appear on the surface of the work, as a visible and tangible unity of all the main points of the artistic form;
- in a broad sense - the end-to-end principle of the construction of an artistic form that imparts tangible integrity, a single tone and color to the work. At the same time distinguish "big styles", so-called. epoch styles (Renaissance, Baroque, Classicism), styles of various trends and trends, national styles and individual styles of artists of the new time.
The ratio between the individual style and the historical style of the epochs and trends at different times develops differently. As a rule, in the early periods of the development of art, the style was one, comprehensive, strictly subordinated to religious and ideological norms; "With the development of aesthetic susceptibility, the need for each epoch in the individuality of style (" style of the epoch "," aesthetic code of the epoch ") gradually fades" (Likhachev DS). Starting from the new time, individual styles that are not reducible to the styles of literary movements, trends and schools, more and more define the "face" of the "great" and classical national styles.
The historical change of artistic styles does not reveal a continuous chain of continuity: inheritance of the style tradition and break with it, assimilation of stable characteristics of the previous style and fundamental repulsion from it - with varying success turn out to be dominant in different historical periods and from different authors.
Style is the most common art history category, which corresponds to the worldview and artistic thinking of large masses of people, artists of an entire era and a large circle of people (S.S. Mokulsky).
Some people think that the technique is changing because the old methods are boring; the desire to refresh these techniques and forcing change equipment. This, of course, is not true. Artistic techniques change, not because they bother, but because the worldview and attitude, and not a single artist, but a whole generation, is changing.
From what has been said so far about style, the following conclusions can be made. Firstly, style is a world view category. Secondly, style is a social category. Because the world is always a social concept.
Thirdly, style is a concrete historical category. This means that you can not think of style outside of time and space, you can not talk about style in general. Style, as a specific historical category, has its own chronological framework and limits.
In each style, of course, reflects a few moments. The main, leading role is played by the worldview. Style cannot be derived directly from the economy, but only from certain ideological processes that arise in the minds of people on this economic basis.
In addition to the worldview, we distinguish in the style of the material of reality, displayed in works of art. In one or another era, this material is different. Accordingly, different subjects, different plots, different images appear in the works of different styles.
Further, in any style reflects the state of culture, civilization, material life of humanity of a particular time.
So now, having examined more or less in detail all the basic psychological, social, aesthetic, philosophical and historical aspects of the fundamental concepts of symbol and style for this work, their interaction and interpenetration, we can proceed directly to the analysis of the psychological symbolism of the above-mentioned types of art in their specifically - historical, style-forming aspect.

ARCHITECTURE

Antica

The architecture of ancient Greece, covering in its development mainly 8-1 centuries. BC, divided into three periods: the archaic, classical and Hellenistic. They were preceded by a period of Crytomicen culture on the territory of southern Greece and the islands of the Aegean Sea and the so-called Homeric period - the time of the disintegration of the clan system and the emergence of early class relations, which resulted in the 8th-7th centuries. BC. to the formation of the ancient slave states. The archaic period coincides with the time of the final composition of the policy (as a city - state) and the formation of the main types of religious and other public buildings. From the second period one should single out the time of the highest flowering of policies, to which the name of the classical period is applied. The leading place in this era belongs to Athens, where the development of slave-owning democracy reached its highest point in the “golden age” of the reign of Pericles, and art and architecture along with it.
The third period - the era of Hellenism - the time of the rise of the Greek - Eastern monarchies and the intensive expansion of Hellenic culture to the new cities of Asia Minor and Egypt, which became major centers of commercial and cultural life.
The Greeks laid the foundation for many of the most important branches of science, they laid the foundations of geometry, static mechanics, which later became the basis for the development of engineering science.
The history of archaic art was basically a history of overcoming the old artistic culture of the clan society and the gradual preparation of the principles of the realistic art of the slave policy, which was further established after the defeat of the "eupatrides".
It was during the archaic period that the system of architectural orders was formed, which lay
the basis of all the further development of ancient architecture. At the same time, a narrative narrative bloom blossoms and a path to the image in sculpture of a beautiful, harmoniously developed person is gradually outlined. From the most ancient period, the archaic culture is also distinguished by the emergence and flourishing of lyric poetry, which is extremely important for the addition of Greek realism, the emergence of which is associated with the isolation of personality from the clan and interest in the world of human feelings.
The art of the archaic is distinguished by its great originality and, with all its essential limited features, possesses its own artistic merit.
In general, the visual arts of the archaic period still carried a lot of conventions and schematism.
In the architecture of the archaic, progressive tendencies of the art of this time were manifested with the greatest force. Already in ancient times, the art of Greece created a new type of building, which over the centuries became a vivid reflection of the ideas of the demos, that is, free citizens of a city - state.
Such a building was a Greek temple, the principal difference of which from the temples of the Ancient East was that it was the center of the most important events in the public life of the citizens of the city - state. The temple was a repository of public treasury and artistic treasures, the square in front of it was a place of meetings and celebrations. The temple embodied the idea of ​​unity, majesty and perfection of the city - state, the inviolability of its social structure.
The architectural forms of the Greek temple did not develop immediately and during the archaic period they underwent a long evolution. However, in the art of archaic, a thoughtful, clear and at the same time very diversely applied system of architectural forms was created, which formed the basis for the further development of Greek architecture.
The times when the temple was a tribal or royal sanctuary, went into the distant past. Already in the 7th c. BC. The altar was finally removed from the temple building to the square in front of it. This was due to the fact that the temple and the square in front of it became the center of mass popular processions and festivities that united all free citizens of the city. In the archaic era, there were experiences of creating huge temples in which large masses of people could fit, but most often the Greek temples were not too large compared to the buildings of the Ancient East and did not suppress a person by their size.
Being the embodiment of the civic unity of the city - state, the temple was placed in the center of the acropolis or the town square, receiving a clearly emphasized dominance in the architectural ensemble of the city. Therefore, although in the old sacred places (Delphi), often located far from cities, new, more sophisticated temples were built, the very type of temple developed, resolving the task of creating an architectural center of social life capable of clearly expressing the spiritual and civil structure of the city - state. The clarity and simplicity of the main architectural forms of the temple and their artistic perfection, accessible and close to the people, acquired special significance.
The social meaning and the purely earthly, human character of the Greek temple did not change because it was dedicated to the god - patron of the city: the development of the Greek religion itself proceeded towards an ever more decisive humanization of its images. The temple dedicated to God was always turned to the main facade to the east, the temples dedicated to the heroes deified after death were turned to the west, towards the realm of the dead.
The simplest and oldest type of stone archaic temple was the so-called "temple in the antes". It consisted of one small room - a naos, open to the east. On its facade, between the antes, that is, the projections of the side walls, two columns were placed. With all this, the "temple in the antes" was close to the ancient megaron. As the main building of the policy "the temple in the antah" was of little use: it was very closed and designed for perception only from the facade. Therefore, it is later, especially in the 6th c. BC, was used most often for small structures (eg Treasuries).
In its origins, the construction of the Greek temple dates back to wooden architecture with mud walls. From here comes the gable roof and beam ceilings; the columns also go back to the wooden pillars. But this does not mean that the construction of Greek temples was a mechanical transfer of wooden structures to stone architecture. The architects of ancient Greece understood and took into account the constructive properties of building materials. However, they sought to emphasize and develop the artistic possibilities hidden in the very structure of the building.As a result of this work, it was a clear and integral artistically meaningful architectural system that emerged, which later became a warrant (which means order, system). It is a clear concept of the structure of the architecture and the structure of the Greek architecture.
The Greek order was formed in two versions - Doric and Ionic. Correspondence
It is an idea of ​​the masculinity.
The Ionic order is orderly, orderly, and elegant; It was not a chance that the elegant and elegant female figures were put. In the ancient Greek architecture, it has been found to be widespread. The main was most often a combination of red and blue. The meteps were colored.
The Greek order system has been mechanically repeated in each successive solution. This is a common solution method. It’s not a problem. Each temple was created specifically for this place. Hence the feeling of artistic uniqueness, which is caused by the Greek temples. It is a harmonious and harmoniously clear for the evolution of the archaic temples.

Painted and sculpture, adorned the archaic temples. It is emphasized that it was an architectonics of its parts. This is a so-called "chryoselefantin" technique, which is a combination of wooden plates, depicting a wooden body, representing a human body, etc. - Phidias: Athena Parthenos, Olympic Zeus). The epoch of Pericles, 450-410 BC. - got the name "High Classics". There was a lot of fun and a lot of fun.architects Iktin and Callicrat. The monuments of the monuments and the monuments of the art of peace of mind. realism.

Gothic

From the second half of the 12th - 13th centuries. It is a particularly high development of western European architecture. Unlike the Romanesque period, the city became the center of the economic, political and cultural activities. Monuments of buildings and artisans and merchants are growing.
Building activity, going out of control, becomes a lot of professional builders, sculptors and artists - citizens, united in the shop organization. The level of construction equipment rises sharply. It is a process of development of the construction of the building of the Romanesque period. .
The Romanesque can be traced back to the architecture of the cathedrals.
It is an arch, a complex frame system of supports and ribbed vault.
In the 13th and 14th centuries, it has been Gothic cathedrals skyline, which is a large trade and craft center.
Sculptures and painting were very popularly developed in Western European art. There are also a series of monumental sculptural windows that can be used. It is clear that it has been shown that it will be a very beautiful way to characterize it.
Gothic masters are widely turned to folklore images and ideas generated by folk fantasy.
In general, it was internally contradictory: it was interstitial, it took it a lot.
In the art of Gothic, in contrast to antiquity, the proportion of secular architecture increased; it became more diverse by purpose, richer in form. In addition to the multi-storey building building shape Improved construction of urban fortifications, fortresses and castles.
It was a new art in Gothic style. Gothic church building It is a great idea to make it true that it is the grand dimensions of the sculptural decoration of the religion.
Gothic art has a great stylistic unity. However, it’s also true that it’s not a real problem. It is enough to compare the French and English Gothic architecture.
Gothic style is the frame of innovation. With her help achieved great savings in material. The wall as a constructive part of the building became superfluous; it was filled with huge windows. It became possible to build buildings of unprecedented heights (up to 40 meters and above).
They were given representations of the mysteries; in the cathedral of university lectures. This is a more complex and widespread world perception.
At the same time, the original, harmonious balance of horizontal and vertical divisions by the 14th century increasingly gives way to the building’s aspiration upward, to the rapid dynamics of architectural forms and rhythms.
Compared to antiquities, Gothic compositions are distinguished by a clearer and more realistic disclosure of the plot, a more narrative and edifying character and, most importantly, great wealth and direct humanity in the transmission of internal state.

Baroque

New themes and new forms in which this theme is realized express a new attitude of man to the world.
The man of the 17th century, under the conditions of the harsh absolutist regulation, lost the consciousness of personal freedom. He constantly feels his dependence on the surrounding society, the laws of which he is forced to obey. For an artist of this era, to determine the characteristic features of a person is also to determine his place in society. Therefore, unlike the art of the High Renaissance, in which a generalized, “non-class” image of a man was usually given, a distinct social coloring of the images is characteristic of 17th century art. It manifests itself not only in the portrait and everyday picture - it penetrates into works on religious and mythological subjects; even genres such as landscape and still life bear the brightest imprint of the artist’s social worldview.
The unprecedented expansion of the forms of artistic reflection of reality and the diversity of these forms with particular acuity put the problem of style to the 17th century art. As the history of the previous major artistic stages shows, the art of each of them was clothed in stylistic forms, that is, it represented a certain system, distinguished by the unity of ideological and figurative principles and techniques of the artistic language. The inherent quality of style is a synthesis, a merger into a single figurative whole of all types of plastic arts, in which architecture plays a leading, organizing role. In this sense, the term "style" is a historical concept, since it characterizes the essential features of a particular artistic era.
An important difference in the art of the 17th century of the preceding stages is that the style systems of this era are characterized by great flexibility and ambiguity. Even Gothic as a style was distinguished by a broad figurative amplitude: within its framework ideal images were created, endowed with features of exaggerated spirituality, and more earthly images, marked by fresh perception of nature. The possibilities of Renaissance art are even wider and more varied in this respect. But with all the variety of artistic qualities of various Gothic monuments between them there is no such fundamental difference as exists, for example, between the full life of Rubens’s heroes, each creation is perceived as a joyous hymn to the glory of earthly beauty, and the mystical ecstasies of the saints of Italian masters whose images are solved in terms of the tragic dualism of the earthly and supersensible. And at the same time, it is impossible not to admit that with these differences both Rubens and the Italian masters carry in their works the signs of a certain common figurative system characteristic of the baroque style as a whole.
Baroque visual art cannot be understood without its connection with architecture. Architecture due to its specificity - the need to combine utilitarian and artistic factors in its creations - turns out to be more than other forms of art, coupled with the material progress of society and more dependent on the dominant ideology, because the most significant buildings are erected for the ruling classes and serve glorification their power. But architecture at the same time is designed to serve the entire society as a whole; for example, religious buildings are intended for the widest circles, for representatives of the widest circles of society. Finally, economic and cultural progress sets new challenges for architects, for example, in the field of urban planning, which also have important social significance.
In the baroque religious buildings - churches and monasteries - all the rich possibilities of the synthesis of architecture, sculpture, painting and decorative art are used to capture the viewer's imagination, make him feel religious feeling, bow down before religious feeling, bow down before the authority of the church.
For Baroque architecture is characterized, above all, a great emotional elation, the pathetic nature of the images. This impression is achieved by a huge scale scope of buildings, exaggerated by the monumentalization of forms, the dynamics of spatial construction, increased plastic expressiveness of volumes. Spatial solutions acquire an unusual complexity, curvilinear outlines predominate in the plans, the walls of the buildings bend, curtain rods, pediments, pilasters, semi-columns grow out of them, windows are framed with platbands of various shapes, and niches are decorated with statues. The overall impression of the rapid movement and richness of the motifs is complemented by sculpture, paintings, stucco work, and finishing with various materials - colored marbles, stucco, and bronze. To this should be added the pictorial contrasts of chiaroscuro, perspective and illusive effects. In the ensembles of the Roman squares religious and palace buildings, works of monumental and decorative sculpture, fountains are combined into a holistic artistic image. The ideological - figurative content of the best works of Baroque architecture often turns out to be wider than their official functions - they reflect the pathos of a turbulent era.
The revitalization of Catholicism in the ideological struggle manifested itself in the extremely strong influence of the church on art, which was assigned an important role in religious propaganda as a means of exerting a strong influence on the masses.

Modern

Modern, modern, “new style” - this is how contemporaries most often called in Russia a very noticeable trend in the spatial arts of 1890–1900, which revealed a visible resemblance to the European style searches of this era and in different countries is called differently: Art Nouveau , Jugendstil, Modern style, etc. As already noted by researchers, the essence of modernity in any of its national versions cannot be fully understood, describing only its general stylistic features. Despite the fact that he had a completely specific plastic language that allows him to correctly identify works of architecture, easel and applied art created at that time, the meaningful meaning of this language does not reveal all the complex ideological and aesthetic impulses underlying the phenomenon under consideration. The style properties of modernity are sometimes compared with the plastic system of the Baroque, rightly seeing between them a certain similarity in the desire of artists to use forms of organic nature as expressive means.
The “new style” in Russia has arisen, experiencing the impact of a more general worldview content of an era refracted through the prism of the complex social and national problems of the country's historical development. That is why the aesthetics of Russian modernism combined not only contradictory, but sometimes directly opposite spiritual quest of its time.
The complex problems of the ideological, aesthetic, and spiritual orientation of the creative interests of the time had a noticeable effect on the way the question of the synthesis of the arts was raised.
The modern style in Russia was, of course, unable to realize, embody all these deep spiritual potencies of culture. Moreover, in his conventional, craft version, as in other countries, he had the ability to turn serious ideas and feelings into banal truths, and plastic searches into intrusive, boring stereotypes. But in the works of the largest representatives of the "new style" there was always an increased susceptibility to the "synthetic" problems of social being and the human spirit. These problems lay at the basis of many artistic designs, it was they who caused the different professions to each other, determining the close connection of their art with the romantic aspirations of the Russian artistic culture of that time.

INTERIOR

Color symbolism

It has been found that among the conditions for the normal functioning of the human body, the psycho-physiological effect of color plays an important role. The summing result of such effects usually manifests itself in varying degrees of physical and emotional state, in a sense of cheerfulness or fatigue, elevation or depression. Emotional perception in relation to color is manifested through its associative influence. The connection of certain phenomena and objects with their characteristic colors has been transformed in the mind of a person into certain sensory feelings that arise when they perceive a color - a symbol. So, the sun, the fire — yellow and red — created a feeling of warmth and became “warm”; the sky, the air, the ice — blue, the blue colors became “cold.” On this basis, new associations were formed: joyful - sad, light - heavy, loud (sonorous) - quiet, dynamic - static, etc. Optical illusions with receding (cold) and approaching (warm) colors have become stable.
For the purposeful use of color, it is necessary to know the steady links between color and the psychological reaction of a person. In this aspect, a number of regularities are established - according to the preference of color tone, according to the figurative associativity of colors, according to the harmony of color combinations. The preferred attitude to certain colors is noticeably manifested in different age groups. In general, warm colors of bright saturation (pure color) are preferable for children, for adults - cool colors of medium saturation and more mixed, for the elderly - achromatic colors of pastel tones.

Symbolism of the form

The amazing associative definiteness of geometric shapes and volumes in antiquity seemed mystical, endowed with a mysterious meaning. What served to use them as symbolic formal signs. The circle, the sphere symbolized unity, continuity of movement, the universe, the world, the sun, life. The square (for example, at the base of the pyramid) symbolized peace, eternity, strength, power.
A. Palladio in his treatise wrote that the ancients reckoned with what is appropriate for every god not only when choosing a place, but also when choosing a form: so the Sun and the Moon, because they constantly rotate, they made temples round or close to temples, also for Vesta, who is called the goddess of the earth, "this element, as is known, is round." The abstract symbolism of simple "eternal forms" is quite common in architecture.
The movement of the form up, into, in breadth or its static nature causes quite definite associations associated with the innate psycho-physiological characteristics of a person. The aspiration of the form upwards, the distance of the mass from the ceiling, the abundance of air above the head invariably give rise to a feeling of relief, freedom, spaciousness (with a sufficiently normal width of the room). A low ceiling with a wide span “visibly” presses an impending weight, creates a feeling of tightness, anxiety, anxiety. In these cases, the shape of the coating plane is also important - flat, sagging, vaulted, inclined.

Design

Every object, unlike a work of art, has a vital purpose, in other words, a function. But almost every person has a need to surround themselves with beautiful objects. Therefore, the value of things encompasses two principles - benefit and beauty. Each subject has a technical and aesthetic foundation, always changeable and historically replaced.
The practical usefulness of a thing does not require an explanation, but it turns out that a certain aesthetic experience can accompany the good. Some subjects can cause sympathy, even a biased emotional attitude towards them. Between a person and a subject there can be deep emotional connections: love for a chair, reminiscent of some family tradition, a cap as a memory of serving in the army, etc. The value of some personal things and even the world of things goes beyond the limits of their consumer sense.
We rarely perceive objects apart: after all, they usually form groups, complexes, or the so-called subject environment. And this medium sometimes has its very specific characteristic. Let us recall at least the room of Gogol Sobakevich or Plyushkin, the office of Goncharovsky Oblomov. Both the walls and things, and the very space that unites them, bear the imprint of a person’s personality, place, time.
When we see in the exhibition window huge tongs of the last century, which chopped sugar, in our view a sugar head wrapped in blue paper emerges, a table in a tavern with a huge kettle, shining copper samovar.
Many things familiar to us have their distant ancestors. What an amazing evolution experienced chairs and chairs - a necessary accessory of life. Inlaid Egyptian chair turned from the ancient Greeks into a strict constructive seat. Over the centuries, this seat acquired the splendor of Baroque, and then the complexity and sophistication of Rococo with its indispensable gilding, the finest carving and white gesso.
How and why did these items change so over time?
This was due to the fact that each of the objects was organically connected with his time, with the culture of his time and, above all, with the technique and art (architecture, sculpture and painting). Each epoch highlighted one, pushed aside another, strengthened some influences and weakened others.
Technique and art before the Renaissance were mostly inseparable, and therefore the stylistic unity of all things around was complete and organic. The department of technology occurred only in the 17-18 centuries and acquired paradoxical forms in the middle of the last century, when the finished product was decorated. The emergence of two specialties was connected with this - an engineer and an artist. It is not difficult to imagine what imprint on the world of things imposed these changed conditions, and how the situation radically changed with the advent of design design, which was characteristic of its fusion of technical and aesthetic principles.
Architecture has always contained in itself the objective world, it was, in essence, its complement. There was always a deep internal connection between the walls of the house and household items — furniture and utensils. The connection between the subject and the sculpture and painting was organic. Surprisingly, for example, the similarity of the form of the Egyptian chest and Egyptian sculpture, the ancient Greek statues had the same plastic character as the ceramic vessels of the time. The painting left its living trace on the Greek vase and on the Egyptian toilet spoon, the wall of the chest and the fireplace screen. And objects, and sculpture, and painting associated ornamentation - in the era of handicraft production, it was a single and essential part of it.

Ornament

Is it possible to define an ornament only as a visually perceived model that does not depict an object? Obviously, it is impossible, because in most cases the ornament is formed not from pure forms alone: ​​images of animals, plants, human figures, various knots and ribbons are used to create it. There is hardly any object in the world that would not be reproduced in the ornament. On the other hand, abstract art gives us samples of non-visual models, which at the same time are not an ornament. An abstract picture of Kandinsky and a square piece of wallpaper differ from each other fundamentally.
More fruitful is the attempt to determine the ornament, based on its purpose or function. Can it be argued that a work of art serves the purposes of image and interpretation, whereas the ornament has no such goals, but simply makes things more attractive. Against this interpretation of the essence of the ornament, there are several objections. First of all, there can not be such a model that would not depict anything. Any form or color has expressiveness: they bring mood with them, express the balance of power and, through their individuality, depict something universal. Therefore, each ornament must have content. However, its content is affected by the function of this ornament. Almost always, the ornament is part of something else. The ornament is intended for visual interpretation of the nature of the object, situation, event. He creates mood, helps to determine the category and meaning of the instrument, furniture, room, person, rite.
Ornament is not limited to the fact that it gives things a more pleasant look. This is only one of its functions, although in modern civilization many are beginning to consider it as the only one. When an ornament is used in a living room, its subject and model are chosen so as to depict a feeling of harmony, calmness, excess health, physical perfection. In the dance hall, strict colors and aggressive forms that create the illusion of active movement can be chosen in accordance with the stimulating effect of jazz music, alcohol and dance rhythms. Pleasure is achieved as a result of the fact that the nature of the ornament meets the needs of people in a given setting. But the task of the ornament is to explain to our eyes the nature of the church building, the palace, the courtroom.The ornament helps to distinguish youth from old age, a football player from a teacher, a cheerful friendly party from a solemn meeting. Being a part of something else, the ornament is specific in nature, that is, its content is limited to the specific features and nature of its carrier.
Such a restriction is unacceptable in the present work of art. If the ornament is part of the objective world in which we live, then the work of art is the image of this world. For this reason, a work of art must meet two conditions. It should be clearly separated from this world and should correctly reflect its universal character. A work of art either does not depend at all on its environment (if, for example, it is exhibited in a museum, where, when we contemplate it, we forget what is around it), or it is (if we take stage art) the center and culmination point of that place. which gives us a view of the world, captured in a work of art. As an image and interpretation of reality, a work of art cannot be one-sided and at the same time reliable.There is the opinion of some aesthetics that the artistic style enriches our worldview, updates and deepens our concept of the whole, but does not limit it. It also follows from this functional difference that the organization and structure of a work of art are internally determined by what it contains, whereas the organization and structure of the ornament are determined from the outside by the object for which it is intended. Therefore, repetition is an inherent property of the ornament; in a work of art, even copying a detail is accompanied by a change in its function. In a work of art, you can’t talk about anything twice; in the ornament you can use the uniform character of the image, regardless of the size of its surface.updates and deepens our concept of the whole, but does not limit it. It also follows from this functional difference that the organization and structure of a work of art are internally determined by what it contains, whereas the organization and structure of the ornament are determined from the outside by the object for which it is intended. Therefore, repetition is an inherent property of the ornament; in a work of art, even copying a detail is accompanied by a change in its function. In a work of art, you can’t talk about anything twice; in the ornament you can use the uniform character of the image, regardless of the size of its surface.updates and deepens our concept of the whole, but does not limit it. It also follows from this functional difference that the organization and structure of a work of art are internally determined by what it contains, whereas the organization and structure of the ornament are determined from the outside by the object for which it is intended. Therefore, repetition is an inherent property of the ornament; in a work of art, even copying a detail is accompanied by a change in its function. In a work of art, you can’t talk about anything twice; in the ornament you can use the uniform character of the image, regardless of the size of its surface.whereas, the organization and structure of the ornament are determined from the outside — by the object for which it is intended. Therefore, repetition is an inherent property of the ornament; in a work of art, even copying a detail is accompanied by a change in its function. In a work of art, you can’t talk about anything twice; in the ornament you can use the uniform character of the image, regardless of the size of its surface.whereas, the organization and structure of the ornament are determined from the outside — by the object for which it is intended. Therefore, repetition is an inherent property of the ornament; in a work of art, even copying a detail is accompanied by a change in its function. In a work of art, you can’t talk about anything twice; in the ornament you can use the uniform character of the image, regardless of the size of its surface.
If we consider the ornament as a work of art, then the one-sidedness of the content and form makes it look empty and silly. When a work of art is used as an ornament, it goes beyond the limits of the ornamental function and thus violates the unity of the whole it is intended to serve. There are imaginative artisans, in whose products there is nothing bad, except for one moment - they claim that the plaster figures they created around the fountain or wallpaper designs are considered a work of art - paintings and sculptures. On the other hand, a good sculpture, located in the corner of a living room for decoration, can distort the overall impression of the room due to the fact that it becomes a powerful center to which everything else must obey.
However, an amendment must be made. Until now, in presenting my point of view, I delimited the concepts of "work of art" and "ornament" on a dichotomous basis. First of all, the concept of "work of art" was used here forced, for want of a more appropriate. It includes the misleading tinge that the ornament has less or no artistic value. In fact, the difference between them concerns only the extent to which the 18th century philosophy expresses a silver spoon, a baroque facade or a painting of Watteau. This degree continuously changes from the simplest ornament on the tools of labor to a completely finished work of art, and during this change there is a gradual change of three characteristics:

1. A part of the whole becomes an independent whole;
2. One-sided image is becoming more and more perfect;
3. The simple and correct form is becoming more and more complex.

The significance and type of the image that has this pattern depends on the function of the object for which it is intended. The simple form of the refrigerator, which is only a device for storing food at a low temperature, will personify the purity and function of preserving things. A tablespoon or a cup of coffee plays a role in the process of eating, which sometimes has a social, philosophical and religious meaning, and also influences the good mood of the guests. Consequently, they should clearly and in proper form contribute to the creation of this mood by their appearance. The building of a bank or church should have a look appropriate to their purpose. The correctness of the form reflects the special role of the building as a reliable, durable means of protecting people and emphasizes its not natural, but artificial nature.thereby delimiting nature and man. In our culture, ornament is declining and its values ​​are being re-evaluated. Some things are attributed to those values, which in fact they do not have. The intrinsic value of other things is not understood, therefore their real value is diminished. A place for an insurance company is allotted in a castle or an old palace; the bathroom depicts a lion sitting on a throne.

SUIT

As soon as humanity learned how to fabricate simple fabrics and sew the most uncomplicated attires, the costume became not only a means of weather protection but also a sign, a symbol expressing complex concepts of social life. Clothing indicated the nationality and class status of a person, his property status and age, and over time the number of messages that could be conveyed to others by color and quality of fabric, ornament and uniform of the suit, the presence or absence of some details and ornaments, increased exponentially . The costume could tell whether a woman, for example, was of marriageable age, whether she was married, or maybe already married, and whether she had children. But only those who could belong to the same community of people could read, decipher all these signs without effort, for they were assimilated in the process of everyday communication.Every nation in each historical epoch developed its own system of symbols, which over the centuries evolved under the influence of cultural contacts, the improvement of technology, the expansion of trade relations. Compared to other types of art, the costume has another unique quality - the ability to react widely and almost instantly to events in the life of the people, to aesthetic and ideological movements in the spiritual sphere.to replace aesthetic and ideological currents in the spiritual realm.to replace aesthetic and ideological currents in the spiritual realm.

Psychological characteristics of the suit.

The psychological characteristic is the transfer of the character's character traits: the kindness of stinginess, arrogance, modesty, prowess, panache, coquetry, etc .; or the transfer of state of mind or mood. It can not be that the nature of a person is not reflected in his appearance. How to wear a suit, what details it has added, what combinations it is made up - all these are dashes that reveal the character of the owner. “He was remarkable for the fact that he always went out with earbuds and with an umbrella, even in very good weather, and in a warm woolen coat,” Chekhov tells about Belikov (“The Man in the Case”), “And he had an umbrella , and the watch is in a gray suede case, and when I took out a penknife to sharpen a pencil, he had a knife in a case; and his face seemed to be in a case, as he kept hiding it in a raised collar. "
You can make a quick sketch of the character. Blessing the nature and petty bourgeoisness A keenly spotted piece of clothing will sometimes tell you more than the most detailed biography. It is an object of interest.
The image of "dead nature" is not more expressive than the sketch of Van Gogh "Shoes".
On the canvas are two battered, just removed shoes. Long ago taking the form of old and big legs, they shrank to the floor, as if afraid to disturb the peace of the minute respite. Dirt, sun and rain left deep wrinkles in old skin. Willingly or unwittingly, the viewer, animating them, will accept the shoes as a living part of the one who has just left, will begin to feed him pity and sympathy. "Exhausted" shoes cause a chain of deep associations and feelings, compassion for the disadvantaged and weak, thoughts of a tragic, lonely old age.
There is no man on the globe, in front of whom a small puny figure drowned in huge pants and trampled, not in height, large boots would not have appeared at the mention of Charlie Chaplin. A bowler, a mustache, and a cane speak of prosperity, but what a sad disappointment we experience when our eyes glide over a baggy frock coat and “someone else's” trousers falling on the boots! No, life failed! Thus, the pieces of clothing, which were built in contrast to the talent, created an unforgettable image of force and impact that became a symbol not only of the “little man”, but also of his performer, Charles Spencer Chaplin.

Costume as a characteristic of time

The costume is the most subtle, loyal and infallible indicator of the distinctive features of society, a small particle of a person, country, nation, lifestyle, thoughts, occupations, professions. Finally, in different parts of the world, in different countries, the development of society had its own specific characteristics, and all of them — climatic, social, national, and aesthetic — are clearly expressed in the variety of costumes.
Each epoch creates its own aesthetic ideal of a person, its own norms of beauty, expressed through the design of a suit, its proportions, details, material, color, hairstyle, makeup. During all periods of the existence of the estate society, the suit was a means of expressing social affiliation, a sign of the privileges of one estate over another. The more complex the structure of society, the richer the tradition, the more diverse the attire.
Finally, it is the state of culture that it received.

Social characteristic of the costume

Only in pre-Petrine Rus could unique and peculiar clothing of the boyars be created. Wealth and arrogance, arrogance and contempt for "hard-working" people, a measured and unshakable way of life created their own notion of the "beauty" of a suit and clothed it in a peculiar form. Thus were born long fur coats, fur-lined and covered with heavy and stiff fabrics, long sleeves that reached the floor, high gorlatnye hats. Peter's desire to bring Russia closer to the European level of industrial development was also manifested in costume reforms. The stationary and clumsy clothes, symbolizing backward Russia, were replaced by a comfortable and relatively simple European suit.
The costume of the Russian merchants kept up to the last day of its existence the traditions of pre-Petrine antiquity: long-woolen cloth clothes,braided hair.
One estate from another was separated by a tangible wall of legislation on the wearing of certain fabrics, on the size and shape of clothing.
The history of the costume, from the European Middle Ages to the 19th century inclusive, is full of decrees and decrees restricting not only the amount of clothing for a particular class, but the length of the hem, the length and shape of the sleeves, and the depth of the neckline cut (neckline). The cost of fabrics determined its consumers. A dress made of expensive Venetian brocade (15th-16th centuries) in Italy was allowed to have dojas and their daughters, while notable city women were allowed only brocaded sleeves.
Not only the nature of the fabric, but also the drawings had their own social face. Shawls were special drawings: merchants, nobility, village. Even handkerchiefs were divided according to rank and rank: lace or thin batiste - noble, fuller or checkered - for officials, paper colored - for burghers.
Big and small events in the world, country, trends in art, literary movements, individual works of poetry and prose, scientific discoveries and technical improvements, the progress of transport — all this is reflected in the forms of the costume, creates what we call fashion.
The struggle of women for equality and the possibility of education, above all, was reflected in the suit. When the word "girl student" immediately appears the image of a woman in a men's straight blouse, a simple skirt and a breech hat (also a man's).

Suit and technical progress

At the end of the 18th century, technical progress in the textile industry led to the market launch of a large number of the finest cotton fabrics: muslin, muslin, tarlatana, etc. Bright muslin becomes fashionable fabric, without it not a single wardrobe of a young lady works, its distribution is so extensive that the girls themselves by the name of the fabric get the nickname of "muslin."
The 60s and 70s of the twentieth century, marked by the stamp of the space age, inspired fashion for the whole system of "simple clothes". And new fabrics and materials pushed designers to create jackets, which the offspring would regard as a tribute to the rocket age: quilted, as analogs of space suits, from shiny fabric, tight, on foam rubber, they abound with zippers (even at elbows) and sparkle with "fittings designs ".
We do not notice clothes because they are part of ourselves, but this is precisely why it characterizes us most of all, which is why it reflects every event, of which we ourselves are a participant or contemporary.
Technological progress accelerates the run of fashion, and each small period of time is drawn to us dressed in his costume. If until the 19th century, we count the periods of change of fashion over the centuries, now such periods are measured in years and months.

Attributes, accessories

Sometimes, a small piece of costume found, an item related to it, is a “knot” of the entire character characteristic. Panikovsky (the "Golden Calf" by I. Ilf and E. Petrov), a petty swindler who had fallen down, left white starch cuffs from the "past time". It doesn’t matter that they are “independent,” since there is no shirt; it is important that now no one wears such details of the costume, and he, Panikovsky, emphasizes his aristocratic background and contempt for all those around the “new people”.
The same social characteristic through a very insignificant stroke in a suit is given by Leo Tolstoy in the novel Anna Karenina. “We are trying in the village,” Levin says, “to bring our hands in such a position that it is more convenient to work with them, for this we cut our nails, we sometimes roll up our sleeves. And then people deliberately release their nails, as far as they can hold, and hook them in the form of cufflinks saucers so that nothing could work with hands. "
There are not and cannot be details that are not related to the character of a person. They talk about occupations, ages, tastes; carry the characteristics of time: the shapes of suitcases, briefcases, bags, brooches, pins, badges, etc., change.

Color in costume

The final touch in the characterization of the suit is color. With people, color is always associated with certain ideas, color is associated with mood and well-being. Attitude to color characterizes temperament, taste. Color in folk clothes means the manifestation of national traditions, age categories, can have a meaning character.
Even in the definitions of people there are color characteristics. We say: "black day", "black deceit", "blue blood", "rose-colored glasses", "rainbow dreams".
As an example, the meaning of color symbolism in everyday life I can cite an anecdotal case from my own observations. In our large square courtyard, as always, in the summer, around the perimeter, a lot of old "clubs" sit together. Naturally, they are not able to know the entire population of a huge house. And in one of the entrances a young family bought two identical pink and blue suits for their baby. So, it is worthwhile for them to go out for a walk with their child, dressed in pink, as unfamiliar grandmothers begin to spew: what a pretty girl, what beautiful eyes she has, and what an elegant, but flirty, real woman she is. If the walk takes place in a blue suit, everyone vying with one another notices the strength of the child, his strong little hands, his aquiline, stern gaze and masculinity striking the eyes.
Color affects others first. This or that shade immediately causes certain sensations and associations. A bright color will immediately attract attention, distract from everything else, become the visual center.

Suit as a symbol

About the association, as a method of art, turned to history and to the disclosure of feelings, Kozintsev writes: "... to imagine their meaning (the royal regalia - the crown), you need to see them as symbols, not as things. History of the people, iron , fire, blood created the ominous associations of these symbols. " The symbolism of the costume is his "soul."
In the film "The End of St. Petersburg" Pudovkina, in the frame on the viewer, an influx of sea bowlers and cylinders flows as a symbol of the death of the old society. There are things with which we associate certain concepts and events. So, leather jacket - the constant companion of the first days of the revolution; blue blouse - workers and women workers of the 30s; sweatshirt - an indispensable form of the employees of this time. A gabardine coat and a blue rubberized raincoat on a checkered lining became the historical identity and symbol of the Muscovite of the 50s, whereas in the 60s the Bologna became the summer uniform - a symbol of the chemicalization of our clothes. The whole history of costume is the history of characters.

Costume - a manifestation of the style of the era

Costume is a form, respectively, "fashioned" with a fabric and giving the shape of some shape. The silhouette changes depending on the style, the characteristics of the whole epoch, or on the fashion, a short-term change in the boundaries of the style. For example, Western European art of the 16th century - baroque, style of court absolutism, solemn and pompous style - creates a suit corresponding to these concepts. In architecture, the Baroque style is revealed in exaggerated forms and proportions of structures, in the excessive decoration of the facades of palaces with endless enfilades of rooms and richly decorated halls, in creating squares with majestic staircases, monuments and grand fountains. How did the costume embody the features of style? From the canvases of painters of this epoch, pompous nobles look in solemn official poses, on foot and on horseback. Massive caftans of men are burdened by an abundance of embroidery and gilding. A rich sling for swords, stockings with openwork arrows and boots with thick red heels, a wig with curls falling over the shoulders and back. Epithets - the court, solemn, majestic, grandiose, characterizing the Baroque style in architecture, painting, sculpture, become legitimate for the costume.

Fashion

Fashion in the broadest sense of the word refers to the attitude to external forms of culture that is generally accepted at a certain period and generally recognized at this stage: to lifestyle, customs of serving and table behavior, cars, clothes. However, when using the word fashion, which always implies a constant and from the standpoint of the mind is not enough explicable desire to change all forms of manifestation of culture, usually mean clothing.
The history of fashion is as old as the history of costume. From the moment when a person discovered the value of clothing as a means of protection from the adverse effects of nature, there was little left until he began to reflect on its aesthetic and stylizing function. Clothing was the object in which he apparently was most directly able to express his artistic outlook. The expression “mysterious language of fashion” we can calmly replace with the phrase “living language of clothes” and especially when applied to historical epochs, because the person’s attire has so far remained a means of visually expressing certain ideas about the suit itself and about the world as a whole.
Since ancient times, man has sought to cover his naked body, which could be explained by chastity and a sense of shame. However, this interpretation seems too narrow and limited. Clothing was not only a cover, but also a symbol. Even the amulet was at one time "clothing", because He was a bridge between the naked, vulnerable human body and the outside world. Vivid examples of the symbolic meaning of certain forms of clothing are the strict rules of the medieval estates or the Spanish monarchs.
Such extant rules for styling a person’s appearance, although in a different form, are found right up to the present day. The French Revolution guillotined not only the heads of aristocrats, but also wigs in the literal and figurative sense. From now on, the absence of a wig was as mandatory in society as the wearing of jeans is now. Clothing says a lot, it exposes certain thoughts.
What a strange contradiction! Clothing represents the most individual creation of human culture, and at the same time alongside fashion, which follows clothing like a shadow, is followed by a powerful instinct of imitation. Psychologically, this moment of imitation can be interpreted as a form of biological self-defense, a natural reflex of herd creatures. Comparison with human society suggests itself.
Imitation at the same time is a necessary prerequisite for fashion, its contradiction; what we call the fashion development process is in essence the merging of contradictions. A person adapts to the world around him, he accepts fashion, but at the same time with the help of this fashion he seeks to differ from the people around him. Man imitates others and at the same time tries in this form of imitation to realize his own self-seizing, his own self-image.
Sometimes at first glance it may seem that fashion is too committed to the elaborate and frivolous, that it suppresses the functional purpose of the dress. However, history knows many examples of the fact that it is fashion that has brought some clearly functional types of clothing to fashionable things. This is also associated with the expression of public prestige, with the manifestation of lifestyles and views on life. For example, jeans, which were originally exclusively cheap working clothes, in a certain period became fashionable and even a prestigious item of costume. The unspoken value of jeans is so binding that it drowns out even the aftertaste of monotony, which in this case is obvious. The girls, who appeared in any situations in jeans and coarse, hanging sweaters, demonstrated more likely their belonging to a certain generation and to a particular social group than their aesthetic views and their personal taste.
An interesting evidence of the relationship between clothing and the social status of people is the English expression for designating graduates of prestigious colleges: they are called “white collars”. Thus, the place of education and the social class are very simply indicated by a characteristic piece of clothing. The same ties of the Anglo-American symbols in the details of the clothing include branded ties of universities and clubs.
Fashion as a whole always strives for a young and fresh impression: it wants to rejuvenate. Anthropologists argue that some primitive tribes made tattoos and clay ornaments on their faces not only for decoration, but also for concealing wrinkles. At the same time, the essence of fashion - change - is closer to the dynamic pace of life of young people.
Thus, a person's clothing is not a shell at all, an external sign or an accidental, insignificant addition: it is to a much greater extent than much of the other material environment of people (furniture, apartment, household items), is a direct symbol of their individual existence, existence group, whole nation or whole epoch.
And if the historical costume is a true mirror of the past, then an integral addition to it is the modern clothing of living peoples who unfold the basic features of their psychology in their diversity.

CONCLUSION

I hope that already from the very beginning of this work it was clear enough that it was based on quite specific psychological theories, in particular L. Vygotsky, A. Leontiev, A. Losev, etc. As was rightly noted, "any study of art is always and without fail forced to use one or another psychological prerequisites and data" (Vygotsky). However, the inverse relationship is just as true - any serious analysis of the psychology of art requires powerful scientific tools from the field of aesthetics and cultural history. Having done this rather laborious work as much as possible, having gathered together the maximum number of art history facts that are directly related to the topic of the psychology of the character, it’s time to sum up some of the results based on the concepts of the aforementioned great Teachers.
This method guarantees us both a sufficient objectivity of the results obtained and all the research systems, because it proceeds every time from the study of hard, objectively existing and taken into account facts. Its general direction can be expressed by the formula of the same Vygotsky - from the form of a work of art, its figurative and stylistic features, through the functional analysis of its elements and structure to recreating the aesthetic response (as the main manifestation of the psychology of art) and to establishing its general laws.
So, omitting at the moment some intermediate reasoning, we can confidently assert that the basis of the aesthetic reaction is a dialectic process consisting of the confrontation and interaction of two multidirectional emotions, called by Aristotle the concept of catharsis. Its basis lies in the inconsistency that is laid in the structure of any artistic work. And since this process takes place in the opposite direction - art, thus, becomes the strongest tool for the most expedient and necessary outbursts of nervous energy. It can be said that the affects of perception and fantasy, the affects of content and form, being in a state of internal discord, antithesis, at the closing point of the "short circuit" give an explosive reaction, leading to the discharge of nervous energy.
The illustrations of the aforementioned contradictions between form and content, artistically and material are not hard to find in any section of art history. It is noteworthy that the artist forces the stone to take on plant forms, branch, turn into an acanthus leaf, a rose or a human body. And it is in this stillness of the material that the creator sees the best condition for creating a tense and expressive living figure. In the Gothic temple, where the feeling of massiveness of the stone is maximized, the architect creates a solemn vertical and achieves the effect that the temple aspires all to the top, all depicts a rush and flight up, and the very lightness, airiness and transparency that architectural art extracts in Gothic from the heavy and inert stone seem to be the best confirmation of our thought. In this slender dismemberment of interlaced arches, like cobwebs, high arches, the same courage is visible, which strikes us in knightly deeds. In their tender outlines the same soft, warm feeling that blows from the troubadours' love songs. And if the artist draws this courage and this tenderness, as the main symbols of chivalry times, from a stone, he obeys the same psycho-aesthetic law, which causes him to rush upward to the stone and create an impression of an arrow flying into the sky. The name of this law is catharsis. It is he who twists the tight Baroque curl in Rome, and in Versailles, and in Berlin, and in Peterhof, because it is a symbol of the great era of absolutism, when even rocks bow in respectful bows under the terrible look of the monarch. It was he who pushes Morris in England, Gaudi in Barcelona, ​​Eifel in Paris, Wagner in Vienna, Shechtel in Moscow to bend concrete and wrought iron into endless drooping irises and falling waves, symbolizing the broken and restless souls of all European intelligentsia of the early twentieth century.
However, the symbolic essence is expressed only indirectly - by what we, the recipients, are told about the content of the work, our knowledge and our reasoning. Appreciation of art is determined by the fact that it helps a person to understand the world and himself, and also shows him what he understood and what he considers true. Everything in this world is unique, individual. But everything is comprehended by the human mind, and this is only because each thing consists of moments inherent not only to a specific object, but that are common to many other or even all things (they are the archetypes - the primary basis of the concept of a symbol). In science, general knowledge arises when all existing phenomena are reduced to one law. This is also true for art.
Dynamics, tension, expression are the basis of aesthetic perception. This indicates the universality of models acquired as a result of life experience in the perception of specific images: consistency and contradiction, content and form, life and death, love and hate, rise and fall. When these dynamic forces are interpreted by us as symbols that shape human destiny, then the expressiveness of art, its psychological impact reaches its highest peak, a true catharsis.

Bibliography

1. Arnheim R. "Art and visual perception." M. 1974.
2. Borev Yu. "Aesthetics". M. 1988.
3. Borisova E., Sternin G. "Russian Modern". M. 1994.
4. Brun V., Tilke M. "The history of costume". M. - Berlin. 1995
5. "Interaction and synthesis of the arts." Sat L. 1978.
6. "The General History of Art" in 6 volumes. M. 1956 - 1965.
7. Vygotsky L. "The Psychology of Art." M. 1987.
8. Godfroy J. "What is psychology" in 2 volumes. M. 1996.
9. Goryunov V., Tubli M. "The architecture of the modern era". SPb. 1994.
10. Gulyanitsky N. "History of Architecture". M. 1984.
11. Zaitsev V. "This many-sided world of fashion". M. 1982.
12. Kibalova L., Gerbenova O., Lamarova M. "Illustrated Encyclopedia of Fashion". Prague. 1986
13. Krastins J., “The Art Nouveau Style in the Architecture of Riga”. M.1988.
14. "A brief psychological dictionary." M. 1985.
15. Leontiev A. "Philosophy of psychology". M. 1994.
16. "Literary encyclopedic dictionary." M. 1987.
17. Losev A. "Philosophy. Mythology. Culture." M. 1991.
18. Mertsalova M. "Costume of different times and peoples" in 2 volumes. M. 1993-1996.
19. Ortega y Gasset H. "Aesthetics. Philosophy of Culture". M. 1991.
20. Parmon F. "Costume Composition". M. 1985.
21. "Problems of style and genre." Sat M. 1979.
22. S. Rappoport "Problems of artistic creativity." M.1978
23. Rannev V. "Interior". M. 1987.
24. Soloviev V. "Philosophy of Art". M. 1991.
25. "Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary". M. 1983.
26. Kholmyansky L., Shchipanov A. "Design". M. 1985.
27. "Morris Aesthetics and Modernity". Sat M. 1987.
28. "Aesthetics". Vocabulary. M. 1989.
29. Foley J. "The Guinness Encyclopedia of Signs & Symbols". 1993.