پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 939 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,735 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 12,724,631 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 9,066,171 |
مطالعه تاریخی بازتاب تحولات نشانهای جنسیت بر روی سنگ قبور زنان از دوره قاجار تا دوره معاصر | ||
| جلوه هنر | ||
| مقاله 2، دوره 13، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 31، شهریور 1400، صفحه 21-33 اصل مقاله (375.45 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/jjh.2021.33357.1569 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| ایلناز رهبر* | ||
| استادیار گروه هنر، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| در این مقاله کوشش شده است تا با تحلیل نشانه شناختی پیرس و تقسیم بندی نشانه به شمایلی، نمایه ای و نمادین، نشانه های مرتبط با زنان بر روی سنگ قبر مطالعه شود. هدف پژوهش دستیابی به تغییرات نشانهای مرتبط با زنان و علت منع استفاده از تصویر برای زنان در این حوزه بوده است. بدین منظور در هر دوره مقایسه ای با مردان نیز صورت گرفته است. نتیجه پژوهش نشان داد که در ایران در ارتباط با زنان مسلمان بر روی سنگ قبر، در ابتدا نشانه های نمایه ای استفاده میشده که علت اصلی استفاده از نشانه نمایه ای بیسوادی بوده و برای زنان و مردان یکسان بوده است. در برخی آرامستان های قدیمی برخی مناطق، نمونه های نادری از تصاویر شمایلی زنان دیده شده است. در دوره قاجاریه که استفاده از سنگ قبر تصویری برای بزرگان متداول می شود، برای زنی قدرتمند چون مهدعلیا از نشانه شمایلی استفاده نمیشود و به نظر می رسد منع مذهبی دلیل آن بوده است. در دوره پهلوی نیز با بررسی سنگ قبر فعالان حوزه فرهنگ و هنر به نظر می رسد برای هم مردان و زنان استفاده از تصویر متداول نبوده که دلیل آن تا حدی به نبود تکنولوژی برمی گردد. در ایران امروز استفاده از تصاویر شمایلی زنان مجدداً متداول شده اگرچه در برخی شهرها منع مذهبی همچنان وجود دارد اما از نظر بیشتر فقهای بزرگ اگر مفسده ای نداشته باشد ایرادی وجود ندارد. روش تحقیق بر اساس هدف بنیادی است و بر اساس روش و ماهیت، تاریخی و توصیفی-تحلیلی بوده است. روش جمع آوری اطلاعات کتابخانه ای و بخشی نیز به شیوه میدانی بوده است. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| سنگ قبر؛ تصویر زن؛ نشانههای جنسیت؛ تحلیل نشانه‌شناختی؛ پیرس | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A Historical Study of the Gender Signs related to Females on Gravestones from Qajar Period till Now | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| I. rahbar | ||
| Assistant Professor, Department of Art, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran, (Corresponding Author). | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| In this essay, an effort has been made to investigate female signs and their changes on gravestones by Peirce's semiotic classification of a sign in three forms: icon, index and symbol. The main subject is to obtain changes of the signs and the reason why women’s pictures were prohibited to use in this respect. In fact, not using female pictures as icon but substituting symbol and index instead of iconic pictures on women’s gravestones is a big challenge. Generally, the usage of shapes in the form of a sign had been common on gravestones. These signs include plant motives, animal motives, decorative motives and human motives. Some of these signs had been an indication of the occupation of the dead person in the time she/he was alive. The reason why these were used was probably due to the illiteracy of ordinary people and lack of ability in reading inscriptions of gravestones. Another striking sign in gravestones was gender segregation. How to show masculine and feminine based on non-linguistic signs on gravestones was a matter. Maybe, one of the biggest obsessions in the author’s mind from childhood was lack of using women’s pictures in obituaries or on gravestones; However, men were not faced with such limitations. After some time, when passing Beheshte-Zahra (the most famous and biggest cemetery in Tehran), I noticed lots of changes in the pictures of gravestones. Moreover, women’s pictures were used on gravestones. This happens in a period of time when women’s pictures in obituaries is not prevalent in contemporary Iran, or at least they are rare. Additionally, women’s pictures on gravestones are less than those of men. The main question of the research is: what have been the shape of the signs related to feminine gender on gravestones and what have been the changes in using these signs and what was the reason of these changes in the course of time? In order to obtain a better result, in each era, a comparison with men is done, as well. The conclusion indicates that index sign was used initially on gravestones which were attributed to Muslim women. The reason for using these signs was the approximate equal ubiquitous illiteracy among both women and men in retrospect. Thereafter, female icons and pictures were virtually used in a number of cities. If we decide to study women’s pictures on gravestones, it is necessary to make a separation between Muslims and other religious minorities such as Christians. Most of Armenian gravestones are kept in Jolfa Museum in Isfahan. In fact, all of these are drawings of gravestones done by Abraham Goorgenian before they were destroyed. Iranian Armenian women’s pictures were used on gravestones after Safavid period when they entered Iran. The remarkable point is that the ancient village of Armenians in Armenia lacked pictures. They began drawing pictures on gravestones just after entering Iran in Safavid period which is a noticeable point. Based on a document, there were Iranian women’s picture as an indication of an icon in some rural areas; however, they were few in number and this was not a general issue. In Qajar period, the time when using pictures and icons were prevalent on grandees’ gravestones, Mahd-i Olia’s iconic sign was not used on her gravestone while her name was written beside poems and Quranic verses; however, she was deemed as a powerful woman; which is conceivably an indication of religious prohibition. In Pahlavi period, based on the gravestones of some iconic figures, it seems that using iconic pictures was not prevalent for both genders. Among prominent women in Pahlavi period with high ranking cultural status, we can refer to Parvin E'tesami (1285-1320 HS), Qamar-ol-Moluk Vaziri (1284-1338 HS) and Forugh Farrokhzad (1313-1345 HS). These three renowned faces are chosen as samples in the first and second Pahlavi period. Parvin E'tesami was a great poet, Qamar-ol-Moluk Vaziri was a singer and a musician; and Forugh Farrokhzad was a great poet in her time. The first one belongs to the first Pahlavi period (demised in Farvardin 1320) and the other two individuals belong to the second Pahlavi period. Parvin E'tesami was buried in Qom, in one of the aprons of the holy shrine of Hazrat Masoumeh. Qamar and Forugh were both buried in Ẓahīr al-Dawlah tomb in Shemiran district. There are no women’s pictures on none of these gravestones. It is conceivable that Parvin could not have had any pictures on her gravestone because of her proximity to the holy shrine. However, by having a look at Qamar’s grave stone and that of Forugh, this surmise can be reinforced that using these kinds of pictures was no prevalent at that period of time. This guess comes true when looking at renowned faces in Ẓahīr al-Dawlah tomb. The interesting point is that on none of famous men’s gravestones, no picture is depicted as well. Then, it can be concluded that using picture on gravestones was not something common for the two genders at that period of time and one reason is due to absence of technology. If using picture had been common, at least one of the referred individuals should have had a picture on her/his gravestone. In today Iran using iconic pictures is becoming common once again though the number of men’s pictures are more than women’s and the prohibition does exist in some cities. The prevalence of pictures in the last decade has been so vast that it has become common even in religious cities, but it is not common in some regions, yet. It is worth noting that there are not any official rules or circulars in cemeteries about using or not using women’s pictures. In other words, each cemetery decides in such situations based on its board of directors’ view. So not in all cities this matter is permitted and it depends on the laws of each cemetery. In some regions, there were some cases in which after creating picture, the family of the demised person demanded for changing the gravestone or eliminating the picture. In other cases, pictures were distorted by extremists; but today these actions have become rare. Apart from individual interest in having a writing or picture, individual beliefs and cultural bigotries of families, do not permit the usage of women’s pictures on gravestones. Actually, based on Shiate’s sharia and most Grand Clergy’s judgment, using women’s pictures is not forbidden provided that she is covered with hijab, her picture is not sin-provoking and there is no sign of disrespect to the dead person in it. Although using women’s pictures is not banned by most Grand Clergies, instead of women’s iconic pictures, many symbols of flowers, candles and candlesticks are used. Also, some people don’t use any pictures and signs at all. So, it should be noted that using picture is arbitrary these days. So, everybody does not use it necessarily. In Tehran, using picture is more common. Pictures of the dead are kept as a commemoration tool in each house when they are not present. So, it can be concluded that their usage is merely commemoration and not something sin-provoking or so. All in all, it is something personal. One is fond of that but others may abhor it exactly like social media in which some put their pictures on their profiles; however, others use iconic pictures or other signs for some reason. It seems that the advancement of technology has been effective in this field. Additionally, as this period of time is the technology era, the necessity of creating pictures in each second of life is palpable and gravestone is not a part separated from other seconds of life. This research is fundamental in purpose research, descriptive-analytical and historical comparative in method and entity, and collection of information was based on library form and field studies. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Gravestone, Women’s picture, Gender Signs, Semiotic, Peirce | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
احمدزاده، فرید و حسینی، سید هاشم و نورسی، حامد (1397). پژوهشی بر شناخت مضامین و نقوش سنگقبور ایل گوران در شهرستان اسلامآباد غرب (شاهآباد سابق). دو فصلنامه مبانی نظری هنرهای تجسمی انجمن علمی هنرهای تجسمی ایران. دوره 3، ش 1، بهار و تابستان: 72-92. احمدی، بابک (1394). از نشانههای تصویری تا متن؛ به سوی نشانهشناسی ارتباط دیداری، تهران: نشر مرکز. الکینز، جیمز (1385). نظریه نشانهشناسی پیرس برای تاریخ هنر چه سخنی دارد؟. ترجمه: فرزان سجودی، گلستان هنر، ش 3، بهار: 18- 30. اعظمزاده، محمد و پورمند، حسنعلی (1388). درآمدی بر نحوه شکلگیری نقوش در سنگگورهای منطقه سفیدچاه، هنرهای زیبا-هنرهای تجسمی، دوره 1، شماره 39: 95-102. براتی، بهاره و افروغ، محمد (1390). بازتاب نمادها و نشانههای شغلی در سنگهای قبور ارامنه. کتاب ماه هنر، ش 156، شهریور: 76- 87 پارسایی، مهدی و شهابیراد، فاطمه (1390). پژوهشی بر نمادهای گرافیکی گورستان دارالسلام شیراز. کتاب ماه هنر، ش 156، شهریور: 68- 74 تناولی، پرویز (1388). سنگ قبر، تهران: نشر بنگاه. تناولی، پرویز (1392). تاریخ مجسمه سازی در ایران، تهران: چاپ و نشر نظر. چندلر، دانیل (1387). مبانی نشانهشناسی، ترجمه: مهدی پارسا، تهران: انتشارات سوره مهر. خدادادی، علی؛ صفیخانی، نینا و احمدپناه، سید ابوتراب (1397). بررسی تطبیقی نقش مایه فرشته در سنگ قبور آرامگاه ارامنه و تخت فولاد اصفهان. هنرهای زیبا، هنرهای تجسمی، دوره 23، ش 3، پاییز: 83-92. ذکاء، یحیی (1349). تاریخچه ساختمانهای ارگ سلطنتی تهران و راهنمای کاخ گلستان. تهران: انتشارت انجمن مفاخر ملی. سجودی، فرزان (1387). نشانهشناسی کاربردی، تهران: نشر علم. سیف، هادی (1397). نقش آفرینی روی سنگ، تهران: سازمان زیباسازی شهر تهران. شانواز، بلال (1395). بازشناسی سنگ قبور تاریخی زنان در گورستان شهر دلبران. مطالعات تاریخ و تمدن ایران و اسلام، دوره 1، ش 4، زمستان: 1-15. شریفینیا، اکبر؛ ساریخانی، مجید؛ دولتیاری، عباس و قائمی، نعیمه (1395). شناخت و بررسی مضامین و نقوش تزیینی سنگ قبور شهرستان درهشهر در استان ایلام. هنرهای زیبا، هنرهای تجسمی، دوره 21، ش 1، بهار: 23-35. شریفینیا، اکبر؛ لشکری، آرش (1397). بررسی و مطالعه نقوش تزیینی سنگ قبور قبرستان مادرزلیخا از شهرستان درهشهر. جلوه هنر، دوره 10، ش 1، شماره پیاپی 19، بهار و تابستان: 65-97. شهبازی، علیرضا شاپور (1384). راهنمای مستند تخت جمشید، تهران، انتشارات سفیران. شهبازی، علیرضا شاپور (1393). راهنمای مستند نقش رستم، تهران، انتشارات سفیران. صفیخانی، نینا؛ احمدپناه، سید ابوتراب و خدادادی، علی (1393). نشانه شناسی نقوش سنگ قبور قبرستان تخت فولاد اصفهان (با تأکید بر نقوش حیوانی شیر و ماهی). نشریه هنرهای زیبا، هنرهای تجسمی، دوره 19، ش 4، زمستان: 67-80. فرخزاد، پوران (1381). کارنمای زنان کارای ایران (از دیروز تا امروز)، تهران، نشر قطره. فرزین، علیرضا (1384). گورنگارههای لرستان، تهران: پژوهشکده مردمشناسی، با همکاری ادراه کل امور فرهنگی. لباف خانیکی، رجب علی (1369). سنگافراشتههای مزارات باخزر. اثر، ش 18 و 19، زمستان: 93-112. مصطفوی، سید محمد تقی (1361). آثار تاریخی طهران امکان متبرکه. تنظیم و تصحیح: میرهاشم محدث. تهران: انجمن آثار و مفاخر فرهنگی. منابع میدانی دهقانی، مجید، مصاحبه شخصی: 29/4/1398، روز سهشنبه، ساعت 17:10 References
Ahmadi, B. (2015). From pictorial signs to the text: toward the semiotics of visual communication, Tehran: Markaz (Text in Persian).
Ahmadzade, F., Hosayni, S.H., Norasi, H. (2018). A Research on the Recognition of Implication & Motifs of Gooran Tribal Gravestones in West Islamabad (Ex-Shah Abad1) City. Theoretical Principles of Visual Arts, Volume 3, Issue 1: 72-92, Doi: 10.22051/JTPVA.2018.3936 (Text in Persian).
Azamzade, M., Poormand, H. (2018), A Preface on the Style of Motifs Formation in Tomb Stones in Sefid Chah’s Area. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba Honar-Ha-Ye Tajassomi, Volume 1, Issue 39,: 95-102, Doi: 10.22059/JFAVA.2009.68296 (Text in Persian).
Barati, B., Afroq, M. (2011). The reflections of the occupation-related signs and symbols in armanian tomb stones, Ketab-e Mah the Arts, No. 156: 76-87 (Text in Persian).
Chandler, D. (2008). The basics semiothics, Translted by Mehdi Parsa, Tehran: Entesharat Soore Mehr (Text in Persian).
Elkins, J (2006). What does Peirce’s Sign Theory Have to Say to Art History?, Golestan-i Honar. Translated by Farzan Sojoodi, No.3: 18-30 (Text in Persian).
Farokhzad, P (2002). Karnam-y Zanan Karaye Iran (az dirooz ta emrooz), Tehran: Nasher Qatre (Text in Persian).
Farzin, A (2005). Grave stone figures of Lorestan, Tehran: Pajoheshkade Mardomshenasi ba hamkari edare kol omoor farhangi (Text in Persian).
Khodadadi, A., Safikhani, N., Ahmadpanah, SA. (2018). A comparative study of the image of angel as a motif engraved on the tombstones of Armenians’ cemetery and those of Takht-e-Foolad cemetery in Esfahan, Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba Honar-Ha-Ye Tajassomi, Volume 23, Issue 3: 83-92, Doi: 10.22059/JFAVA.2018.227470.665609 (Text in Persian).
Labaf Khaniki, RA. (1991). Sang afrashtehhay mazarat bakhraz, Athar, No. 18 &19: 93-112 (Text in Persian).
Moghbeli, A., Afzal Toosi, E., Samei, B. (2018). The Role Check & Iranian Identity of Women in the Images of Women Portrayed during the 80s, 90s & 2000s in Keyhan Bacheha Magazine, Glory of Art (Jelve-y Honar) Alzahra Scientific Quarterly Journal, Volume 10, Issue 3- Serial Number 21: 29-46. Doi: 10.22051/JJH.2018.8376.1060 (Text in Persian).Mostafavi, SMT. (1982). Asar Tarikhi Tehran Amaken Motebareke, Tehran: Anjoman Asar va Mafakher Meli (Text in Persian).
Parsai, M., Shahabi Rad, F. (2011). A Research on Graphic symbols of Dar-al-salam Cemetery of Shiraz, Ketab-e Mah the Arts, No. 156: 68-74 (Text in Persian).Sharifinia, A., Sarikhani, M., Dolatyari, A., Ghaemi, N. (2016). Recognition and investigation of the themes and reliefs of tombstones of the City Darreh-Shahr in Ilam Province, Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba Honar-Ha-Ye Tajassomi, Volume 21, Issue 1: 23-35, Doi: 10.22059/JFAVA.2016.57707 (Text in Persian).Sharifinia, A., Lashkari, A., (2018). A Review and Study of Decorative Motifs of Tombstones in Madar Zoleykhah Cemetery in Darreh Shahr, Glory of Art (Jelve-y Honar) Alzahra Scientific Quarterly Journal, Volume 10, Issue 1- Serial Number 19: 65-97. Doi: 10.22051/JJH.2017.9247.1081 (Text in Persian).
Safikhani, N., Ahmadpanah, SA., Khodadadi, A. (2014). Semiotic of Isfahan s Takht-e Foulad Cemetery Motifs (With Emphasis on Animal Motifs of Lion and Fish, Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba Honar-Ha-Ye Tajassomi, Volume 19, Issue 4: 67-80, Doi: 10.22059/JFAVA.2014.55422 (Text in Persian).Seif, H (2018). Carving on Stone, Tehran: Sazman Zibasazi Shar Tehran (Text in Persian).
Shanvaz, B. (2017). Bazshenasi Sang qobor tarikhi zanan dar gorestan shar Delbaran, Studies of Iranian and Islamic history and civilization, Issue 1, No. 4: 1-15 (Text in Persian).Shapur Shahbazi, A (2005). Rahnamye-i mostanad-i Takht-i Jamshid. Tehran: Safiran (Text in Persian).
Shapur Shahbazi, A (2014). Rahnamye-i mostanad-i Naqsh-i Rustam-i Fars. Tehran: Safiran (Text in Persian).
Sojoodi, F (2008). Neshane shenasi Karbordi, Tehran: Nashre Elm (Text in Persian).
Stronach, D., Royce, W. (1981). standing Stones in the Atrek Region: The Ḥālat Nabī Cemetery. Iran, Taylor & Francis, Ltd., Vol. 19, 147-150.
Tanavoli, P (2009). Tombstones, Tehran: Bongah (Text in Persian).
Tanavoli, P (2009). A history sculptures in Iran, Tehran: Nazar (Text in Persian).
Zoka, Y (1971). Tarikhch-i Sakhtemanhaye Arg-i Saltanati Tehran va Rahnamaye Kakh-i Golestan. Tehran: Anjoman Asar-i Meli (Text in Persian).
منابع اینترنتی افشار، ایرج (1389). تازهها و پارههای ایرانشناسی ( ۶۴). مجله فرهنگی هنری بخارا، شماره 72، 73، برگرفته از http://bukharamag.com/1389.02.623.html، بازیابی شده در تاریخ 3 مرداد 1398. -رضایی آغوزگله، محمدرضا (1396)، قبرستان اسرار آمیز در شمال ایران. عکاس: سید وحید حسینی/ آنا، غلامرضا رضایی آغوزگله، برگرفته از https://persiadigest.com/fa/news، بازیابی شده در تاریخ 27 خرداد 1398. -گهستونی، مجتبی (1396)، دستاوردهای یک پژوهش هنری/نقوش مرده‌ای که بر صنایع‌دستی جان گرفتند. برگرفته از بازیابی شده در تاریخ 27 خرداد 1398. ،http://farhangemrooz.com/news URL1:https://iranmazar.com (access date 2019/6/20).
URL 2: https://www.parsine.com/fa/news (access date 2019/11/20). | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 783 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 520 |
||