مجسمه در میدان یا غار افلاطونی؟

نوع مقاله: ترویجی

نویسندگان

1 پژوهشگر دکتری پژوهش هنر / دانشگاه الزهرا

2 دکتری پژوهش هنر / دانشگاه الزهرا

چکیده

پس از دوره قاجار با الگوبرداری از مدرنیسم غربی، در شهر تهران فضاهایی موسوم به میدان ایجاد شد که از معنای تاریخی «میدان» در زبان فارسی به مثابه فضایی تعاملی، تجمع‌پذیر و پیاده‌مدار، دور و به «فلکه» به منزله فضای مناسب برای تردد سواره نزدیک بوده است. متأسفانه امروز این دو عنصر شهری- میدان و فلکه- یکی انگاشته می‌شود. از پیامدهای مخرب این انطباق، قرارگیری مجسمه در مرکز این فلکه‌هاست که در حال حاضر تبدیل به اصل زیبایی‌ساز و هویت‌بخش منظر شهری شده است. نتیجه این رفتار آن است که امروزه مدیریت شهری، هنرمندان و شهروندان، این فلکه‌ها را معادل ذهنی و تاریخی میدان تلقی کرده و مرکز آن را مناسب‌ترین مکان برای قرارگیری مجسمه شهری می‌شناسند.
این مقاله نشان می‌دهد که با توجه به تعریف هنر شهری به مثابه هنری ویژه فضاهای عمومی، میادین [فلکه‌های] تهران محمل مناسبی برای حضور مجسمه نیست؛ چراکه فضای آنها در رده فضای جمعی به معنای فضاهایی اجتماعی و تعاملی با مخاطب‌جای نمی‌گیرند و مجسمه‌ فلکه‌ها قادر نیست نقش مورد انتظار از هنر شهری را ایفا نماید. 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Sculpture, in the Square or in the Plato’s Cave?

نویسندگان [English]

  • Padideh Adelvand 1
  • Ashraf-al sadat Mousavilar 2
1 Ph.D candidate in Art Research / Alzahra University
2 Ph.D in Art Research / Alzahra University
چکیده [English]

After the Qajar period, taking a cue from Western modernism, the spaces known as square were created in Tehran that are far away from the historical meaning of the "square" in the Persian language as an interactive, aggregatable and walkable space that have been close to "round-about" as an appropriate atmosphere for traffic roadway. Unfortunately, these two urban elements are considered as one municipal phenomenon. The destructive consequence of this adaptation led to install of sculpture in the center of the roundabout that has now become the principle of aestheticizing and identifying of the urban landscape.
The result of this behavior is that, today's urban management, artists and citizens, consider these roundabouts as the subjective and historical representative of squares and the center of it as the most appropriate location for installing an urban sculpture.
Given that the sculpture as a visual attraction should bear the inviting property to a sociability space, an available place for stopping, walking and experiencing of collective life, the question arises here is that which of the existing squares in Tehran is bearing the true meaning of the sculpture that would include the desired influences.
These squares do not include any safe and secure space for pedestrians as the dominance of vehicles around it fail to form the social communication and gatherings. So they are not only considered as the factors in the provision of collective life stop encouraging the citizens of Tehran to attend and interact in the space, but also because of the chaos and high mobility are repellent of the population and social activity.
Therefore, the squares [roundabouts] of Tehran are not considered as a good place for installing sculptures because the atmosphere is not presenting a proper level of social and interactive public space with spectators and so the installation will not be able to play the role expected of urban art.
It seems that the lack of attention to the importance of the placement of sculpture and the audiences, in the current atmosphere of Tehran, is rooted in theoretical and performance concepts; like as a partial translation of Western resources has been implemented and, as we known round about as a square and as a local public space suitable for urban sculpture.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Urban sculpture
  • Square
  • Roundabout
  • modernism
  • Tehran