پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 25 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 939 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,734 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 12,721,445 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 9,063,733 |
ساختار روایی کنشی گرمس در متن و تصویر خاوران‌نامه ابن حسام مطالعه موردی (گشوده شدن قلعه خیبر به دست امیرمومنان علی) | ||
| پژوهش نامه گرافیک نقاشی | ||
| مقاله 11، دوره 6، شماره 10، شهریور 1402، صفحه 148-162 اصل مقاله (1000.63 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/pgr.2023.41524.1170 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| گیتا مصباح* | ||
| استادیار گروه نقاشی، دانشگاه هنر شیراز، شیراز، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| مکتب نشانه‌شناسی پاریس که اساس آن مبتنی بر «بررسی روابط بین نشانه‌ها و چگونگی بیان معنی توسط آن‌ها در متن» است دارای الگوهای ساختارگرایانه گوناگونی برای توصیف و تحلیل متن است که «الگوی کنشی» گرمس، یکی از این روش‌های ساختارگرای تقلیلی است. از آن‌جا که یکی از ویژگی‌های بارز نقاشی ایرانی، وابستگی آن به متون ادبی و روایتگری این متون است، در این پژوهش کوشش شد با تکیه بر ویژگی‌های روایت ارائه‌شده در الگوی کنشی گرمس به بررسی ساختار نحوی روایی در نگاره «گشوده شدن قلعه خیبر به دست امیرمومنان علی(ع)» از خاوران‌نامه ابن‌حسام خوسفی بیرجندی پرداخته شود. در این راستا، به این پرسش اصلی پاسخ داده می‌شود که روابط تقابلی روایی در پیوند میان متن و تصویر چگونه است؟ بر این اساس، مسأله پژوهش بررسی روابط روایی حاکم بر متن ادبی و تصویری نگاره است. پژوهش از نوع توصیفی-تحلیلی و شیوه گردآوری اطلاعات اسنادی و با استفاده از منابع مکتوب و مشاهده است. در این مقاله، افزون بر توصیف عناصر ساختاری روایت، روابط زمانی حاکم بر نگاره استخراج و تحلیل می‌گردد. با تقلیل عناصر روایت بر مبنای محور همنشینی به سه دسته زوج تقابلی، زمینه تحلیل نگاره بر اساس ساختار روایت فراهم می‌شود. سپس با شناسایی و تطبیق سه دسته زوج تقابلی موجود در نگاره، زیردسته‌های کنشی آن‌ها برای شناسایی قطعیت و احتمال، فعال یا منفعل‌بودن کنش بررسی شده‌است. نتیجه این پژوهش، همراه با تأیید برقراری روابط توالی زمانی؛ همزمانی فراگیر، کامل و همزمانی- توالی و توالی با تاخیر، همچنین تبدیل روابط زمانی به مکانی را آشکار می‌سازد و نشان‌دهنده همخوانی بصری و کنشی نگاره با الگوهای جدید روایی است. در پایان، همخوانی روایت موجود در نگاره با ساختار نحوی روایت مبتنی بر وجود روابط همنشینی قراردادی، اجرایی و انفصالی در روبنا نیز به دست می‌آید. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها: روایت‌شناسی؛ الگوی کنشی؛ گرمس؛ خاوران‌نامه؛ قلعه خیبر | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Khavarannama Actantial Narrative Structure A Greimasian Study on “The Conquest of Khaybar Fort by Imam Ali” | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Gita Mesbah | ||
| Assistant Professor, Department of Painting, Shiraz University of Arts, Shiraz, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| One of the most significant contributions of structuralism is narratology. The composition forms the narration in the image, the relation between pictorial elements, and their hidden static and dynamic interactions. Narrative phenomena are not investigated separately and independently, but their relations are. Persian paintings are full of undiscovered hidden meanings. Literary methods are used to analyse the semantic structure of them. Semiotics, provides various tools for reading the structure of visual and literary texts. The "Paris school" of semiotics, which is based on "the study of the relationships between signs and how they express meaning in the text", has several structuralist models for analysing and describing the meaning of the text, and the " actantial model" of Greimas is one of these deductive structuralist methods. Algirdas Julien Greimas, the most famous theorist of narratology, went beyond Propp’s studies with his actantial model to reach the grammar of narration. His flexible narratology model is adaptable to literary and non-literal texts. So, the main structure of the narration could be analysed. The main characteristic of narration is having a beginning and end. Each story is a collection of plots that could be formed of several principal and sub-narratives. The plot is the sequential unit of time that is made of literal, behavioral, and thoughtful acts. The linguistic, especially the phonemic progress of the child obey the same laws of implication. The human mind is formed of the oppositions which organises the perception of nature on the basis of the outside world. If the child's acquisition of distinction B implies is the acquisition of distinction A, the loss of A in aphasia implies the absence of B, and the rehabilitation of the aphasic follows the same order as the child's phonemic development. The same laws of implication under the languages of the world both in their static and dynamic aspects. The presence of B implies the presence of A and, correspondingly, B cannot emerge in the phonemic pattern of a language unless A is there. Likewise, A cannot disappear from a language as long as B exists. Therefore, his “Elementary structure of signification” is explained using the oppositions, consisting of a four-membered device A:B::-A:-B that works in every sign system. The members of this opposing system are A, and its opposite B. The negation of A means - A, the negation of B means -B. He believes that each narration includes two representation levels: immanent which holds the semantic and structural characteristics and manifestation level. The actantial model is laid at the immanent level by which the narration structure is analyzed. So according to him, the underlying level of narratives is significant. Therefore, the narration chain allows the presence of oppositions by confrontations of actants with principal acts. Like the language, the grammar of narration is limited. He develops his “actantial model” relying on Propp’s narratological experiences on fairy tales which is used for the interpretation of texts and images. The “actantial model” consists of six components on three axes: the axis of desire consists of the Subject/Object, the axis of power includes Helper/Opponent, and finally the axis of transmission whit the opponents of Sender/Receiver. The subject is what is directed toward an object. The relationship established between the subject and the object is called a junction. Depending on whether the object is conjoined with the subject or disjoined it is called a conjunction or a disjunction. The helper assists in achieving the desired junction between the subject and object; the opponent hinders the same. The sender is the element requesting the establishment of the junction between subject and object. The receiver is the element for which the quest is being undertaken. To simplify, the receiver is as that which benefits from achieving the junction between subject and object. Sender elements are often receiver elements as well. The mythical structure of text is formed based on the most dominant pair: Subject/Object. Greimas believes that the basic structure of meaning in all the texts is made of the pair of desire and the pair of power. They make the “elementary structure of signification”; A:B::-A:-B. These three groups of actants perform three types of narrative coexistence structures. From the standpoint of natural ontology (which defines what kinds of beings, broadly speaking, make up reality), an actant may correspond to: (1) an anthropomorphic being (2) a concrete, inanimate element, including things, although not limited to the concrete, (3) a concept. An actant may be individual or collective. In theory, the six actants may belong to any of the three ontological categories. In actual application, there are some common exclusions: subjects, senders and receivers tend to belong to the category of anthropomorphic beings. However, if one defines the sender as the element that acts, voluntarily or not, to elicit either wanting-to-do or having-to-do the action, then it can belong to any of the three ontological categories. Since one of the prominent characteristics of Persian Painting is its dependence on literary texts and the narration of these texts, it has been tried to investigate the narrative syntactic structure in the painting by relying on the characteristics of the narrative provided by Greimas’ actantial model while explaining this model. “The Conquest of Khaybar Fort by Imam Ali” is discussed from Khavarannama of Ibn Hossam Khusfi Birjandi. The research is of a descriptive-analytical type, the analysis tool of Greimas’ actantial model and the method of collecting documentary information using written and sources. The research tries to answer the main question: what is the relationship between the dual confrontations in the narrative chain of conquering Khaybar fort? Based on this, the problem of the research is to know the impact of the relationship between the dual confrontations on the visual structure of the painting of the conquest of Khaybar Castle. While describing the structural elements of the narrative, the temporal relations governing the picture are extracted and analyzed. The analysis of narrative is done by reducing the actants into three axes of opposing couples. Then, by identifying and comparing the three categories of opposite pairs in the picture, their action subcategories are checked to identify the certainty and probability, active or passive performance of the action. The result of this investigation along with the proof of the establishment of time succession relationships; inclusive simultaneity, strict simultaneity and simultaneity- succession, immediate and mediate simultaneity reveals the transformation of time relations into space and shows the visual and action compatibility of the image with new narrative patterns and finally the compatibility of the narrative in the image with the syntactic structure. The “Actantial Model” helped to investigate the immanent and manifestation levels of the structure in both literary and pictorial texts and the findings prove the narrative structure of them. Accompanying the text, the painter has tried to use a reductionist approach by depicting the concepts in the opponents of up/down, left/right, and big/small as the characteristics of the image. According to the actantial model, the compliance of the image and poetry can be seen in the form of the reduction of the characters in the image into three opposing pairs, at the basic level of the text. On the other hand, it was observed that all the characters of the painting have the ability to be analyzed by sub-categories of actants. The painter has used the visual opponents artistically to demonstrate the semantic concepts of power/weakness, good/evil, and victory/defeat, which places the most important actants of the narration into the model and forms the main narrative structure of the narration: the victory of good over evil. In alignment of text and image, the temporal sequence in the literary narrative is preserved in some parts of the image and is transformed into a spatial placement which is the artist's skill to preserve the narration's temporal sequence. This is the expression of simultaneity in Persian painting. At the superstructure level of the text, the syntagmatic relations of components in the form of performancial, contractual, and disjunctional of various components in connection with the basic level are seen to complete the narration structure. Finally, the verbal signs of the literary text are not used as an ornamental component, but as a part that completes the narration with other signs, and has an active presence in the occurrence of the event. Therefore, it could be said, in actantial analysing a text it is possible to reach its essence by sub-narrative and metanarrative analysis, hence considering the validity of “The Khaybar Fort is Conquered by Imam Ali” narrative and the narrative chain which governs the texts it could be possible to generalise the results to other narratives of the manuscript. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Keywords: Narratology, Actantial Model, Greimas, Khavarannama, The Khybar Fort | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
منابع
احمدپناه، سید ابوتراب؛ جباری، انسیه (1393). «تحلیل نگاره بارگاه کیومرث اثر سلطان محمد بر اساس الگوی کنشی و مربع معناشناسی گرمس»، پژوهش هنر، 4 (7)، 75-86.
احمدی، بابک (1389). از نشانه‌های تصویری تا متن (چاپ نهم)، تهران: مرکز.
اسکولز، رابرت (1383). درآمدی بر ساختارگرایی در ادبیات (چاپ دوم). ترجمة فرزانه طاهری، آگاه، تهران.
بورکهارت، تیتوس (1386). مبانی هنر اسلامی. ترجمة امیر نصری. حقیقت: تهران.
جلال کمالی، فتانه (1386). «پژوهشی پیرامون پیشینه جلوه های بصری نور در نگارگری». باغ نظر، 8، 34-23.
حجّاری، محمد جواد؛ آزادانی پور، مریم (1401). «نظام شبکه و شگرد دورخوانی در روایتگری نقاشیها و تصاویر پاره‌گفتگو». پژوهشنامه گرافیک نقاشی، 5 (8)، 4-15. doi: 10.22051/pgr.2022.41460.1154
خوســفی بیرجنــدی، ابــن حســام (1381)، خاوران‌نامــه: شاهکاری از ادبیات و هنر نقاشی ایران(قرن نهم هجری)، تهران: وزارت فرهنگ و ارشاد اسلامی.
سجودی، فرزان (1382). نشانه‌شناسی کاربردی (چاپ اول)، تهران: نشر قصه.
عنایتی، راضیه؛ شیخی، علیرضا (1401). «مطالعه بصری جایگاه حضرت علی(ع) در نگاره‌های فتح خیبر (نسخ مجمع‌التواریخ تیموری، خاوران‌نامه ترکمان، فالنامه، آثارالمظفر، روضه‌الصفا، حبیب‌السیر و قصص‌الانبیا دوره صفوی)»، رهپویه هنر، 5 (1)، 5-16.
کاظمی‌راد، محمد (1401). «تقابل خیر و شر در سه نمونه از نگاره‌های خاوران نامه». پژوهشنامه گرافیک نقاشی، 5 (9)، doi: 10.22051/pgr.2023.41536.1174
کمالی دولت‌آبادی، رسول (1396). بازخوانی عرفانی مبانی هنرهای تجسمی، تهران: سوره مهر.
گرین، کیت؛ لبیهان، جیل (١٣٨٣). درسنامۀ نظریه و نقد ادبـی. ترجمـۀ لیلا بهرانی‌محمدی، پروانه حکیم‌جوادی، مازیار حسین‌زاده، فرناز فتاحی، اکرم حسینی، بردیا لشگری‌بروجردی و فاطمه حسینی. تهران: روزنگار.
مشهدی، محمد امیر؛ ثواب، فاطمه (1393). «تحلیل ساختار روایتی داستان بهرام و گلاندام برپایة نظریه گرمس»، متن‌پژوهی ادبی، 61، 83-106.
مکوئیلان، مارتین (1388)، گزیده مقالات روایت، ترجمة فتاح محمدی، تهران: مینوی خرد.
موسوی‌لر، اشرف السادات؛ مصباح، گیتا (1390) «تحلیل ساختار روایت در نگاره مرگ ضحاک بر اساس الگوی کنشی گریماس». هنرهای زیبا - هنرهای تجسمی، 45، 33-23.
مهدی‌زاده، علیرضا (1394). «تحلیل نگاره های فتح خیبر مربوط به دوره‌های تیموری، ترکمن و صفوی». مطالعات تطبیقی هنر، 10، 97-108.
Refrences
Ahmadi, B. (2010). From Pictorial Signs to the Text: Toward the Semiotics of Visual Communication, (12nd ed), Tehran: Markaz, (Text in Persian).
Ahmadpanah, A., Jabbari, E. (2014) “The analysis of the Miniature “The Court of Kiumars” by Sultan Mohammad based on Greimas’s functional pattern and Semantic Square”, Pazhuhesh-e Honar (Biannual), 4 (7), 75-86, (Text in Persian).
Burckhardt, T. (2007). Basics of Islamic Art, Tehran: Haghighat (Text in Persian).
Culler, J. (1981). The Pursuit of Sign: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Enayati, R., Sheikhi, A. (2022). “A visual study of the position of Imam Ali (AS) in the paintings of the Khyber conquest: Copies of the Timurid Majma 'al-Tawarikh, Turkoman Khavarannameh, Falnameh, Al-Muzaffar works, Rawdah al-Safa, Habib al-Sir, and Qasas al-Anbiya in the Safavid period”, Rahpooye Honar, 5 (1), 5-16, (Text in Persian).
Green, K., LeBihan, J. (1383). Critical Theory and Practice: A Coursebook, Translated by Leila Bahrani Mohammadi, Parvaneh Hakhim Javadi, Maziyar Hossein Zadef, Farnaz Fattahi, Akram Hosseini, Bardia Lashkari Broujerdy and Fatemeh Hosseini, Tehran: Rooznegar, (Text in Persian).
Greimas, A. J. ([1966] 1983). Structural Semantics, Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press.
Greimas, A. J.; Proter, C. (1977). “Elements of a narrative grammar”, Diacritics, 7 (1), 23-40.
Haj'jari, M., Azadanipour, M. (2022), “The narration of paintings and conversation pieces through network theory and distant reading”, Journal of Graphic Arts and Painting, 5 (8), 4-15, (Text in Persian).
Hawkes, T. (1977). Structuralism and Semiotics, London and New York: Routledge.
Hawkes, T. (2003). Structuralism and Semiotics, London and New York: Routledge.
Hébert, L. (2020). An Introduction to Applied Semiotics Tools for Text and Image Analysis, Translated by Julie Tabler, New York: Routledge.
Jakobson, R., Hall, M. (1956). Fundamentals of Language, Berlin, New York: The Hague, Mouton.
Jalalkamali, F. (2007) “Historical background of visual effects of light in Iranian Painting”. Baghe-E- Nazar, 4(8), 23-34, (Text in Persian).
Kamali Dolat Abadi, R. (2017). Mystical Reading of the Visual Arts' Basics. Tehran: Soreh Mehr.
Kazemi Rad, M. (2023). “The conflict between Good and Evil in three samples of paintings of Khavaran-nameh”. Journal of Graphic Arts and Painting, 5 (9), 146-155, (Text in Persian).
Khusifi Birjandi, I. H. (2002), Khāvaran Nāmeh, Miniature Paintings and Illuminations by Farhād Naghāsh 15th Century, Tehran: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, (Text in Persian).
Mashhadi, M. A., Savab, F. (2014). “Analysis of the narrative structure of the story of Bahram and Gol-andam Based on Greimas theory”, Literary Text Research, 61, 83-105, (Text in Persian).
McQuillan, M., (2009). The Narrative Reader, Tehran: Minoy-e- kherad, (Text in Persian).
Mehdizadeh, A. (2016). “Paintings analysis of the “conquest of Kheybar”: Related to Timurid, Turkmen and Safavid Period”, Scientific Journal of Motaleate-e Tatbighi-e Honar, 5 (10), 97-108, (Text in Persian).
Mousavi Lar, A., S., Mesbah, G. (2011). “Analyzing the narrative structure of “The death of Zahhak”; A Persian painting; According to Greimas’s Actantial model”, Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Honar-Ha-ye-Tajassomi, 3 (45), 23-34. (Text in Persian).
Scholes, R. E. (2004) Structuralism in Literature (2nd ed), Translated by Farzaneh Taheri, Tehran: Agah, (Text in Persian).
Sojoudi, F. (2003), Functional Semiotics, (1nd ed), Tehran: Ghese, (Text in Persian). | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 142 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 125 |
||