ПРОБЛЕМА МІМЕЗИСУ В ІСТОРІЇ ГУМАНІТАРНОГО ЗНАННЯ
The problem of mimesis in the history of the humanities

Summary/Abstract: The historical humanitarian discourse of the problem of mimesis, base aspects of of its analysis by different scientific spheres are researched. The main attention is paid to aesthetic aspects of mimetic problematique. The term "mimesis" functions for a long time in different scientific humanitarian contexts: aesthetic, psychological, art, culturological, sociological. There are main scientific vectors of its research: a) mimesis as psychological assimilation, suggestion, instinctive, spontaneous imitating nature; b) mimesis as socialized imitating in social-cultural formation of a person; mimetic problems of the philosophy of history, formation of public opinion, manipulations of mass consciousness; c) mimesis in artistic-cultural area as main factor of imaginative works and existing art at large.The consideration of aesthetic aspect of the problem begins in philosophy of the antiquity. Rome-Hellenism used theses of Greek philosophers, without making any own conception.The mediaeval thought confirmed mimesis as necessary imitation in art to signs and elements of God perfectness. Mimesis as imitation to nature, antiquity and recognized master has transferred into the central artistic-aesthetic problem in Renaissance.The baroque and the classicism interpreted mimesis as artistic recreation of cultural reorganized natural surroundings, poetical ideas and metaphors were admitted as consequence of mimetic creation.In the sequel, two variants of interpretation were developed – as word for word reproduction and free reproduction; gradually the understanding mimesis as passive phenomenon, not enough corresponded to creative nature of the art, predominates.In ХVIII century, it was firstly said about fundamental for all kinds of art status of mimesis, which, however, was interpreted only as exact copying of beautiful nature phenomenon. This point of view dominated in subsequent period.The main accent was on plastic arts, the poetry was withdrawn from the sphere of mimesis` activity. The Age of the Enlightenment proclaimed the necessity of reconstruction the truthful reality.An aesthetic of XIX century showed the interest to mimesis in connection with discussing problems of realism and naturalism in art. In XX century it was sharp polarization of opinions: a) mimesis as an important base of image creation, b) complete denial of its artistic reasonability.Modern aesthetic considers mimesis as the way of artistic shaping of separate periods, first of all, classical art, but it contrasts it to the principals of free subjective figurative creativity in non-classical art, what levels real meaning of phenomenon, existing bulk of synonyms and interpretations makes its analysis harder.Each style period forms original mimetic type, which depends on vision paradigm, spiritual-value points, aesthetic awareness of the social medium and separate artists, developing technique base etc. and presents its own interpretation of the essence of the mimesis.It is revealed the dynamics of developing the mimetic principle: early antique mimesis – imitating ecstatic psychical conditions; the mimesis of antique classic – imitating perfect corporal forms of harmonious Space; the medieval mimesis – imitating solely perfect God`s beauty of transcendent world; the Renascence mimesis – imitating nature beauty of the earth, person, ideals of antiquity; baroque mimesis – imitating dramatic dualism of being; Romantic mimesis – imitating dynamics of human`s feelings and eternal searching the ideal of perfectness; modern mimesis – imitating the tragedy of perception of the world.The difference between artistic results of different mimetic types led to contrasting mimetic and non-mimetic styles and periods, which presented them; contrasting, which was maximum revealed in opposition art "classical" (mimetic) and "non-classical" (non-mimetic).But the mimesis doesn’t mean automatic repeating or direct imitating natural form (Aristotle told about it), and it is inherent in its own original typological variant to each artistic period.Artistic mimesis means not duplication of sense taken forms of reality, but indirect imitating (means of idealization, typification, deformation, schematization, abstraction) senses of phenomenon, associatively connected with it.The analysis of bases of art is topical for intensification of understanding of its essence, researching different demonstrations, modifications and frank deformations during all its history, particularly in modern cultural context. Using the facts of art analysis of concrete artistic manifestations of mimetic figurativeness will undoubtedly assist identification of deep essence both mimetic phenomenon and art at large.

• Details
• Contents