Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
MA in Painting, Department of Painting, Faculty of Arts, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2
Associate Professor, Department of Cinema, Iranian Academy of Arts, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
This study attempts to clarify the place of painting in Sergei Parajanov’s cinema. He is one of the influential directors in the world of cinema who, influenced by religious ideas as well as intellectual and cognitive perceptions of Armenian culture, language, and history, has created works of art in the field of cinema. One of these works is the film ‘The Color of the Pomegranate,’ which is the subject of this study. This film, like other world cinema circles, is also particularly famous in Iran. The present study has been conducted with a descriptive-analytical approach in accordance with the requirements of its subject. By referring to various domestic sources, it can be seen that unfortunately little research has been done on this subject, or it has not been addressed independently; the research that has been done has been either solely in the field of cinema art or solely in the field of Sergei Parajanov’s artistry as a painter. In this study, while introducing Parajanov’s personality in various artistic dimensions such as painting, poetry, and cinema, Armenian history, culture, and civilization have also been introduced. Although the film ‘The Color of Pomegranate’ is specifically introduced in this study, we also get to know his other artistic and cinematic works, especially from the perspective of visual values, which is the main goal of this article. By studying and considering all of Parajanov’s works, we realize a single spirit and an integrated whole, all of which show a deep meaning influenced by the aforementioned history and culture. In addition, in the process of conducting this research, by utilizing the diverse and rich sources of Armenian folk and visual culture in the film ‘The Color of Pomegranate,’ we further understand the connection between the visual values of painting and cinema in Parajanov’s works. Considering the small number of sources on the subject of the research and by carefully examining and analyzing the works of Sergei Parajanov—both his paintings and his cinematic works—results were obtained that show the importance of the connection between the art of painting and cinema even more than before. The main question of the research is, what kind of relationships exist between Parajanov’s paintings and cinematic works? In answering this question, most attention has been paid to his outstanding work, ‘The Color of Pomegranate.’ Sergei Parajanov is a film director who has a valuable class and position in the world. To accurately and correctly address his artistic personality, one must look at both his production works and his other works, such as paintings. Various studies have shown that there is a close and defined connection between his paintings and his cinematic works, which has given both of his works distinctive characteristics and status. It should be noted that without paying attention to one of the two aspects mentioned, it may not be possible to achieve a correct and acceptable analysis. Therefore, in the present research, an attempt has been made to examine all the fields and areas related to this issue. In addition to the considerations and studies of all of his visual, literary, and written works, the views and published writings of others in this regard have also been addressed. In this article, we will get acquainted with all of his arts, including painting and cinema, and especially the film ‘The Color of Pomegranate.’ Sergei Parajanov, an Armenian director, holds a prominent place in the history of world cinema. His works, including ‘The Color of the Pomegranate,’ were produced with the benefit of Armenian popular and visual culture. This film was clearly influenced by the visual values of painting and its schools. This film has strong visual symbolic support. It should be noted that the art of painting and the art of cinema have much in common in various aspects of aesthetics and visual language. Certainly, addressing it will strengthen both artistic fields. In addition to cinematography, Parajanov is known for his graphic and visual works, especially visual and volumetric collages. Since childhood, he was fascinated by ethnic affiliations such as dance, music, and painting. “Sergey’s completed films, unfinished films, and even unrealized projects testify to his respect for myths, ancient traditions, legends, and his penchant for the supernatural” (Galastyan, 82: 1400). Parajanov has four feature films and nine short films in his filmography; among his documentaries, two have received the most attention; they are about two painters. The first one, made in Armenia and named ‘Hakob Honatanian,’ is about an Armenian painter living in Tbilisi in the 19th century, and the second one, made in Georgia and named ‘Arabesques of Pirosmani,’ is about a Georgian painter of Armenian descent. In his article titled “An Artist Determined to Save Beauty,” Siranush Galestian introduces Parajanov’s four feature films as follows: Shadows of Our Forgotten Ancestors (1964), Sayat-Nava or the Color of Pomegranates (1969), Suram Castle (1985), and Strange Lover (1988). The elements of aesthetics in cinema have similarities with the elements of aesthetics in painting. Alain Rabegri believes that cinematic forms and shapes can create a reality or perceive content from within it; this makes cinema an art. In this context, there are important common elements between cinema and painting that make cinema of particular importance. On the other hand, cinema is a language that is understood through signs and images, and the concept of cinema aesthetics begins from the point where the breaking of time and space is achieved through technique. By examining and analyzing mise-en-scène in the expressive meaning of the image, we finally arrive at a clear and lucid understanding of the film. Therefore, the importance of mise-en-scène is that it makes us understand the phenomena behind it through images. The research theory is related to Clive Bell’s ‘aesthetic hypothesis’ in the first chapter of his book Art, where he writes, “The common attribute of all works of art is meaningful form” (Bakhtiarian, 2014: 111). He goes on to clarify that in pure aesthetics, there is no need to “peek into the mental state of its creator” (Bakhtiarian, 2014: 113). From Bell’s perspective, meaningful form is the only characteristic feature of art that also stimulates and evokes a certain ‘aesthetic emotion’ in the audience. Clive Bell considered Cézanne’s works to be the supreme example of painting and believed that his works contained meaningful form. According to Bell, Post-Impressionist painters largely ignored realistic representation and copying in their works, and therefore, Bell had found meaningful form in their art. According to Clive Bell, the beginning of all aesthetic systems is based on a personal experience of a specific feeling, and objects that generate aesthetic feelings are considered works of art. From Bell’s perspective, although all works of art cause a specific feeling in the audience, different works of art do not create the same feeling in the audience. According to him, all aesthetic feelings are of the same type. Of course, Bell has limited this type of aesthetic feeling to works of visual arts such as painting, sculpture, architecture, and the like. According to Bell, finding the common feature of objects that generate aesthetic feelings is the main problem of aesthetics. This feature is the distinguishing feature of works of art from other non-artistic objects. Bell considers the reason for classifying works of art and distinguishing them from other classes of objects to be the existence of a special and unique attribute and characteristic that belongs to the class of works of art. He considers this unique and special attribute to be an inherent rather than a contingent attribute. According to Bell, a work of art without such a unique and special attribute is worthless and cannot be considered a work of art. Bell introduces this common attribute as ‘meaningful form,’ and he explains this meaningful form as the combination and relationships between forms, colors, and lines that stimulate the aesthetic feelings of the audience. According to Bell, who largely limits his definition of meaningful form to the visual arts, the relationships and combinations between forms in works of art (meaningful form) are the unique and common characteristic and attribute of works of art.
Keywords
Subjects
