پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 967 |
| تعداد مقالات | 8,010 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 13,573,711 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 9,616,352 |
جنبه‌های زیباشناختی نشانهای ملی (سلطنتی) دوره دوم پهلوی ایران و بریتانیا با تأکید بر استعاره‌ها | ||
| پژوهش نامه گرافیک نقاشی | ||
| مقاله 1، دوره 5، شماره 9، بهمن 1401، صفحه 4-19 اصل مقاله (1.01 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/pgr.2023.41903.1190 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| ساجده نیکیان1؛ فریده آفرین* 2 | ||
| 1کارشناسی ارشد پژوهش هنر، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان ، ایران. | ||
| 2دانشیار گروه پژوهش هنر، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران، نویسنده مسئول. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| با توجه به اهمیت استعاره‌ها در طراحی دو نشان سلطنتی پهلوی دوم ایران و بریتانیا، پرسش این است که تأثیر کاربرد استعاره‌ها در درک زیبایی نهایی نشانهای سلطنتی/ملی این دو کشور چیست؟ هدف و مسیر بر این اساس است که تجزیه و تحلیل و ترکیب عناصر ساختاری به سمت تشخیص نوع استعاره و ویژگی‌های زیباشناختی آنها پیش برود. روش پژوهش در تجزیه و تحلیل نشانها توصیفی-تحلیلی است و در بر شمردن شباهت‌ها و تفاوت‌ها، تطبیقی است. روش گردآوری اطلاعات، اسنادی است. رویکرد پژوهش متکی به آرای نظریه‌پردازان حوزه شناختی و زیباشناختی است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد اشتراک ویژگی‌های ساختاری بیشتر از تفاوت‌های دو نشان است. از جنبة معنایی، نشان بریتانیا به لحاظ تعدد عناصر تشکیل‌یافته، پربارتر است. معانی هر کدام از عناصر در نشانها متأثر از شرایط سیاسی و مذهبی و پیشینة فرهنگی و تاریخی آن کشور است، بعد معنوی در نشان بریتانیا پررنگ‌تر است و در نشان پهلوی دوم بعد تاریخی مشخص‌تر است، زیرا دوره پهلوی همه دوره‌های پرافتخار تاریخی را در نشان گرد هم آورده‌است. در نشان بریتانیا، تعداد استعارههای مجاورتی کمتر از استعارههای ترکیبی است. در این نشان، نقش انسجام به عنوان ویژگی زیباساز قوی است. نشان پهلوی دوم، استعارههای مجاورتی بیشتری دارد. در نشان پهلوی دوم، پیچیدگی به معنای تعدد عناصر مهم‌تر از انسجام و وحدت‌یافتگی است. با تکیه بر دستاورد این پژوهش تأثیرگذاری طراحی نشان بریتانیا بر نشان پهلوی دوم و نیز شناسایی مسیر جهت‌گیری نشانهای این دو کشور در آینده به واسطه میثاق‌ها و اهداف مهم از جنبه‌های ساختاری، معنایی و زیباشناختی آسان‌تر می‌گردد | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها: نشان سلطنتی/ملی؛ استعاره؛ زیبایی؛ پیچیدگی؛ وحدت | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The Aesthetic Aspects of the Royal Emblems of the Second Pahlavi Period of Iran Britain with Emphasis on Metaphors | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Sajedeh Nikian1؛ Farideh Afarin2 | ||
| 1MA., Department of Art Research, Faculty of Art, Semnan University,Semnan, Iran. | ||
| 2Associate Professor,Department of Art Research, Faculty of Art, Semnan University,Semnan, Iran, Corresponding Author. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Considering the importance of metaphors in the design of the second Pahlavi royal emblem of Iran and Britain, the question is: What is the impact of visual metaphors on comprehending the final beauty of the two royal emblems? The goal and path is based on the analysis of structural elements to advance towards identifying the type of visual metaphors and their aesthetic features. It is a comparative research with a descriptive-analytical method that enumerates the similarities and differences. The method of data gatherig is library information collection. The research approach is based on the theorists in cognitive and aesthetics field of research. After considering several elements in the royal emblems of the two countries, the similarities between the two emblems are as follows: in the center of both emblems, the image of a shield can be seen, which consists of four parts. In the second Pahlavi emblem, the national signs of the Achaemenid, Sassanid, Islamic, Qajar periods can be seen around the first Pahlavi one. The British royal emblem also shows the image of the three lions of England in the first and fourth quarters. The Scottish standing lion also belongs to the second quadrant and the image of the Irish harp also belongs to the third quadrant. The use of crown and lion is also one of the similar points between both Iranian and english emblems. Both of them use mythical animals or hybrid creatures such as phonix, Farvahar and unicorn. Both of them have supports or ribbons with a royal slogan placed in the below section of the emblems. Justice in the second Pahlavi emblem is like a divine gift to the king. In the British emblem, the kingdom is a kind of divine entitlement from God, which is given to the king as a judge. The differences are as follows: the emblem of Britain uses its belt and along with the buckle instead of hanging on the cross or Mary's ascension. It can be seen in the Pahlavi emblem by means of a chain, and also the vine leaves around the shield, the torpedo mouth arabesques, and the flower motifs are among the decorations of the Pahlavi emblem. Thistle (symbol of Mary's virginity and Christ's crown), Theodore's rose (symbol of the union of the houses of York and Lancaster) and clover (symbol of St. Patrick) are among the decorative elements of the British emblem. The rising sun in the center of the Pahlavi royal emblem is not seen in the British. The final difference can also be stated in the placement of two guard lions around the Pahlavi emblem and the placement of a unicorn and a lion in the British one. The second pahlavi emblem has more hybrid creatures, while the unicorn is the only mythical creature of the British emblem. In the emblem of Britain, the helmet of the knights can be seen and it suggests a human whose body seems empty, while in the second Pahlavi one, it is more difficult to recognize such a thing due to the lack of leaves to suggest hair. The origin of metaphors in the second Pahlavi royal emblem shows the following purposes in order. Crown implies the material concepts such as royalty and kingdom power, shield states guarding the country and the sword indicates spiritual concepts such as the importance of Shiism. The lion shows the purposes such as protection, courage and Imam Ali (peace be upon him). Farvahar means divine and spiritual forces and indicates the Achaemenid period, phonix (simurgh) states the cosmic and supernatural forces and suggest Sassanid era, Damavand implies the mythological and Pahlavi era of Iran. Blue, yellow, and red colours, respectively, choose the brightness and spirituality; wisdom and blessing; happiness and prosperity as their destinations. Origin of Metaphors in British Royal emblem show the purposes as follows: crown implies the spiritual growth and enlightenment, golden helmet indicates the Royal family and chivalry, standing lion means the king and guardian of the worldly force, the horizontal lion implicates the power of the kingdom, the unicorn indicates Christ and Patron, the belt shows the power-covenant and ascension to heaven, three horizontal lions decision making- foresight, also is the sign of England, harp shows spiritual growth -Irish Gods and country, the Standing Lion indicates broad-handed and long-armed, also indicates Scotland, full shield; is a sign of Great Britain and the United Kingdom. Metaphor in white, red, yellow, blue, green, red and white colours, respectively, implies purity and innocence; lordship and virtue of ruling; The power of the sun and blessing-kingdom; spirituality-spiritual growth; life and immortality; The union of the kingdom (York and Lancaster houses in past and two other contries in present) is the destination. From the common purposes of the two emblems, the need to confirm religion, guarding and protecting, and the importance of the kingdom's power on earth, and the importance of the king are inferred. In the Pahlavi emblem, different historical eras and their unity are understood, while in the royal emblem of the United Kingdom, the united countries are more important than the historical period of England itself. The spiritual dimension is more prominent in the emblem of Britain. It is as if more universal concepts are needed to unite different countries. In the second Pahlavi emblem, the historical dimension is more specific, because the Pahlavi period brought together all the proud historical periods in the emblem. The results show that the similarities of structural features is greater than the differences between the two emblems. From a content dimension, the emblem of Britain is more fruitful in terms of the multiplicity of elements. The meanings of each of the elements in the emblems are affected by the political and religious conditions and the cultural and historical precedents of that country. The comparison of the beautifying characteristics, shows that the more visual metaphors, the more complex the design seems to be, and the audience faces more tension and more defamiliarization. The greater the unity or harmony, the greater the possibility of entering to the threshold of beauty. In the emblem of second pahlavi, substitional metaphors are almost equal to combinational metaphors. In terms of unity, the repetitive designs such as damavand, lion, sword, yellow, and colours like blue show the Pahlavi emblem as coherent and unified. In this design, complexity is more important than unity. In the emblem of Britain, the substitional metaphors are less than the combinational type. The combinational metaphors cause the unity of discrete parts or components. For example, in the emblem of Britain, the helmet, the shield and the belt together evoke a royal body and there is less tension in finding the final destination. In this emblem, unity as a beautifying charactristic seems a little stronger than complexity. The results show that the discussion about beauty is not solely dependent on the harmoy of the shape and form and colours of emblems or works of art. The conceptual and meaningful dimension also plays an important role in the distinguishing of beauty. The harmony of whole composition and holistic content is realy determinant. The beauty of visual metaphors includes both harmony and complexity of formal and content aspects. The historical precedence of the design and construction of the emblem of Britain (from 1837 up to 1952), the structural similarities between the two emblems, reveals the possible influence of the second Pahlavi emblem from the of Britain, although in the design of both emblems, different components with historical, cultural and political themes are understood. Through the study of emblems, it becomes easier to identify the direction of their relation in the future due to important agreements and goals from structural, content and aesthetic aspects. Finally, the study of the royal emblems of two countries makes it possible to identify the perspective of the today goals and future covenants. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Keywords: Royal Emblems, Visual Metaphors, Beautifying Characters, Unity, Complexity | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
اختیاری، اسفندیار، پشوتنیزاده، آزاده و اخویجو، رامین (1390). «تحولات نماد الوهی فرشته با الهام از نقش فروهر و بنمایه سیمرغ»، زن در فرهنگ و هنر، 1 (3)، 5-23.
استوار، مسیب (1391). رنگ، تهران: رازنامه.
ایمن شهیدی، مرتضی (1393). مقایسه روابط ایران و انگلیس در دوره پهلوی اول و دوم، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد، رشتة تاریخ، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.
آفرین، فریده؛ نیکیان، ساجده (1401). «مطالعه تطبیقی نمادها در نشانهای ملی دوره اول پهلوی ایران و جمهوری چین»، جلوه هنر. انتشار آنلاین
بروس میتفورد، میراندا (1388). فرهنگ مصور نمادها و نشانهها در جهان، ترجمه زهرا تاران و ابوالقاسم دادور، تهران: کلهر و الزهرا.
بروس میتفورد، میراندا (1394). دایرهالمعارف مصور نمادها و نشانهها، ترجمه معصومه انصاری و حبیب بشیرپور (چاپ اول)، تهران: نشر سایان.
بهنام، مرتضی (1394). «تقدس کوه در اساطیر ایران»، تاریخپژوهی، 17 (64)، 355- 373.
ذکاء، یحیی (1344). «تاریخچه تغییرات و تحولات درفش و علامت دولت ایران از آغاز سده سیزدهم تا امروز»، هنر و مردم، 38، 21-29.
صراحی، محمد امین (1393). «رویکردی رده‌شناختی به استعارههای مربوط به رنگ در زبان فارسی»، زبان پژوهی، 6 (11)، 98-118. Doi: 10.22051/JLR.2014.1093
علیخانی، پریسا؛ اکبری، فاطمه؛ نژاد ابراهیمی، احد. (1397). «مطالعة تطبیقی پرندگان اسطوره ای در ایران و تمدن های مجاور؛ مطالعه موردی: سیمرغ و عنقا»، جلوه هنر، 10 (2)، 66-55. Doi: 10.22051/jjh.2017.10522.1127
فربود، فریناز و سیاحی، ماه منیر (1396). «بازتاب مذهب تشیع در طراحی نقوش منسوجات فاطمیان مصر»، مبانی نظری هنرهای تجسمی، 2 (2)، 85-98. Doi: 10.22051/JTPVA.2018.3987
کاشانیزاده، زهرا؛ اسفیدانی، محمدرحیم؛ کیماسی، مسعود؛ معنویراد، میترا (1398). «طراحی نوعشناسی آرایههای تصویری با تمرکز بر رابطه تعاملی استعاره و مجاز در تبلیغات چاپی»، تحقیقات بازاریابی نوین، 9 (1)، 144-125. doi: 10.22108/nmrj.2019.116155.1676
لاکست، ژان (۱۳۹۰). فلسفه هنر، ترجمه محمدرضا ابوالقاسمی، تهران: نشر ماهی.
لیکاف، جرج و جانسون، مارک (1397). استعارههایی که با آنها زندگی میکنیم، ترجمه هاجر آقا ابراهیمی (چاپ سوم)، تهران: نشر علم.
مدیر شانهچی، محسن (1388). «روابط فرهنگی ایران و انگلستان در عصر قاجار با تاکید بر نقش ایران پژوهان انگلیسی»، پژوهشنامه تاریخ، 4 (16)، 1-42.
نصرتی، مسعود (1385). «تجلی قداست کوه، دنیایی در پس آنچه پیش روی است»، کتاب ماه هنر، 99 و 100، 112-117.
وایلدر، جسی برایانت (1395). تاریخ هنر، ترجمه صفورا برومند، تهران: آوند دانش.
هال، جیمز (1380). فرهنگ نگاره‌ای نمادها در هنر شرق و غرب، ترجمه رقیه بهزادی. تهران: فرهنگ معاصر.
References
Afarin, F., Nikian, S. (2022). “Comparative Study of the Symbols in the National Emblems of the First Pahlavi Dynasty in Iran and the Republic of China”,Glory of Art, Published online, (Text in Persian).
AliKhani, P., Akbari, F., NejadEbrahimi, A. (2018). “The Compatative Study of Mythical Birds in Iran and Neighboring Civilizations, Case Study: Sēnmurw& Phoenix”, Glory of Art, 11 (2), 55-66, (Text in Persian).
Alizadehbirjandi, Z., Hamidi, S., Malekzadeh, E., (2017). “Analyzing the Origin and Functions of the State Emblems of the Qajar Era”, Historical Studies, 8 (1), 79-98, (Text in Persian).
Behnam, M. (2014). “The Sacred Mountain in Iranian Mythology”, Journal of Historical Research, 17 (64), 355-373, (Text in Persian).
Bruce-Mitford, M. (2009). The Illustrated Book of Signs & Symbols, Translated by Zahra Taran and Abolghasem Dadvar , Iran: Kalhor pub and Alzahra university, (Text in Persian).
Bruce-Mitford, M. (2015). The Illustrated Book of Signs & Symbols, Translated by Masoomeh Ansari and Habib Bashirpoor, Tehran: Cyan publication, (Text in Persian).
Cirton, J. E. )2001.( A Dictionary of Symbols, London: Routledge
Ekhtiari, E., Pashootanizadeh, A., Akhavijo, R. (2011). “The Course of Angeles’ Divinity Image Inspired by Fravahr Pattern and Phoenix Subject”, Journal of Woman in culture and Art, 3, 1 (3) 5-23, (Text in Persian).
Farbod, F., Sayyahi, M, (2018). Reflections of Shi’a Islam Beliefs in Fatimid Arts (Case Study: Fatimid Textiles), Theoretical Principles of Visual Arts, 2 (2), 85-98, (Text in Persian). Doi: 10.22051/JTPVA.2018.3987
Gkiouzepas, L., Hogg, M. (2014). Articulating a New Framework for Visual Metaphors in Advertising, Journal of Advertising, 40 (1), 103-120.
Hall, J. (2001). Illustrated Dictionary of Symbols in Eastern and Western Art, Translated by Roghayeh Behzadi, Iran: Farhang-e-Moaser, (Text in Persian).
Hutcheson, F. (1973). Francis Hutcheson: An Inquiry Concerning Beauty, Order, Harmony, Design, Edited by Peter Kivy, Netherland: Springer.
Imen Shahidi, M., Sarafrazi, A., Vakili, H. (2014). Comparing the Relations between Iran and England during the First and Second Pahlavi periods, Master's thesis, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, (Text in Persian).
Kashanizadeh, Z., Esfidani, M. A., Keimasi, M., Manavi Rad, M. (2019), “Designing a Typology for Visual Rhetoric with a Focus on the Interaction of Metaphor and Metonymy in Print Advertising”, New Marketing Research Journal, 6 (11), 97-118, (Text in Persian).
Lacoste, J., (2011). La philosophie de l'art, Translated by MohammadReza Abolghasemi, Tehran: Mahi, (Text in Persian).
Lakoff, G., Johnson, M. (2017), Metaphors We Live By, Translated by Hajar Agha Ebrahimi (3nd ed), Tehran: Elm, (Text in Persian).
Modir Shanechi, M. (2008). “Cultural relation in the era of Qajar between Iran and Uk with emphasis on the role of British Scholars”, Journal of History Research,4 (16), 1-42, (Text in Persian).
Moncreiffe, D., Pottinger, L. (1953). Simple Heraldry Cheerfully Illustrated, United States: Thomas Nelson & Sons.
Nosrati, M. (2006). “The Manifestation of the Holiness of the Mountain, A World behind What Is in Front of You”, Monthly Book of Art, (99 &100), 112-117, (Text in Persian).
Ostowar, M. (2013). Colour, Tehran: Raznameh, (Text in Persian).
Parsons, G., Faul, M., (2011). British Royal Banners,1199. Paper presented in 24th International Congress of Vexillology, Washington D.C 1-5 August, 799-811.
Sorahi, M. A., (2014). “Cognitive Study of Color Metaphors in Persian”, Journal of Language Research, 6 (11), 97-118. Doi: 10.22051/JLR.2014.1093, (Text in Persian).
Wilder, J. B., (2007), Art History for Dummies, Translated by Safora Brumand, Tehran: Avande Danesh, (Text in Persian).
Yan, L. (2020). “A Cognitive Study of the Color Metaphor of Yellow”, Education & Multidisciplinary Studies, 16 (2), 123-127.
Zoka, Y., (1955). The History of the Changes and Evolutions of Darfash and the Sign of the Iranian Government from the Beginning of the 13th Century until Today, Art and People, 38, 21-29, (Text in Persian).
URLs
URL 1: https://www.farahpahlavi.org/about/coat-of/arms. The Imperial Standard of Iran. (n.d). Retrieved April 15, 2021
URL 2: https://www.rct.uk/resources/pdf-pack-design-a-coat-of-arms Royal Collection Trust. (n.d). Retrieved April 18, 2021
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 281 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 279 |
||