Sokolov, Evgeniy Georgievich D.Sc. in Philosophy, Professor, Head of the Department of Russian Philosophy and Culture, Saint Petersburg State University, Institute of Philosophy, Saint Petersburg, Russia EGSlov@gmail.com
Abstract The report focuses on the issue of how aesthetic presets registered as a (professional, always - author's one) speculative-discursive canon of a certain era are, on the one hand, a mechanism for adjusting the optics of perception of artistry, and therefore conduct a preliminary taxonomic examination through a system of criteria and thereby block the access of others that do not correspond to the latter, on the other – nevertheless, they allow (under certain conditions) the circulation of certain phenomena that are "outside the law" on formal grounds, as a "surplus element" (K. Malevich) or a "reserve" that can be put into circulation and used in the future. The fact that aesthetics (pure speculation) precedes psychology is both entogenetic and phylogenetic maxims, as well as a historical given: aesthetics as an independent discipline is at least a century older than psychology and, even more so, the psychology of perception of artistic reality. The scrupulous ordering of the latter, as well as the elaboration of its artistic reality, procedural and procedural regulations in their general outlines, had already occurred by the time art was specially concerned with the development of paideutical (in fact), having scientific (including somatic-psychological) justification, programs aimed at recruiting adherents. The essence of such efforts is quite obvious: the smooth functioning of the entire Creator-Creation-Viewer communication system. Or: adaptation is the mounting of reality (endowment or, on the contrary, deprivation of the status of artistry of certain phenomena) under the canon, as well as the fitting of the anthropological substrate under it. However, among the legalized and quite respectable (nominally) precedents, one can find phenomena that, in principle, cannot be subjected to either aesthetic or artistic-analytical expertise, because they are beyond both classical and postclassical "vedic" (literary, art, musicological, etc.) attribution, but are invariably present in the cultural archive. Among the most famous I will mention the following. Breton-Supo's "Magnetic fields". In any research, even the briefest reference books, this text is referred to as a classic surrealist literary work. If you remove the ideology (mechanical writing, the release of subconscious impulses, etc.), then there is actually nothing literary in it. He is outside the literary canon. Another example: the designer "create your Vasareli" by V. Vasareli. Neither the ideology of op art, nor the canons of the design rubric under which this name is most often mentioned, can fully qualify or identify the "proper artistic" of this designer. And finally, the Philips Pavilion at the World Expo 58 in Brussels (Electronic Poem) by Le Corbusier-Xenakis-Varez. Hardly this precedent can, in principle, be subjected to analysis within the framework of musicology or art history.
Keywords: aesthetics, canons of artistic reality, "Magnetic fields", designer Vasareli, Philips pavilion at Expo 58, Xenakis, Le Corbusier