Engraving and Religious Imagery in the Modern Age: Between Verisimilitude and the Suggestion of Non-Existent Realities. Analysis of Some Cases Elaborated in Spain

The didactic importance of the religious image can be appreciated in the use of engraving and its power to disseminate, especially in the urban society of the Modern Age, in connection with the printed book. Such images will use their evocative power to suggest, based on observable realities, a reality that never existed, but which is convenient to create: The image will be able to construct this reality and convince observers of its undoubted existence. Some examples elaborated in Spain will be analyzed, as well as their inventors or the engravers who followed the instructions of the previous ones.

Достоевский, Аполлон Григорьев, Бахтин

Аполлон Григорьев и Бахтин затрагивали достаточно разные вопросы творчества Достоевского, но корреляция между их работами очевидна на уровне их металогики, их философии, их культур-философских оснований. Григорьев, вместе с Достоевским, находился у истоков почвенничества, хотя отзывы Григорьева о творчестве Достоевского эпизодичны и довольно инвективны. Григорьев, в основном, отказывал Достоевскому в том, что его искусство соответствует «правде жизни». Но и первый вариант книги Бахтина о Достоевском не был апологетическим. Григорьев и Бахтин реализуют свою философию через эстетику (философию искусства). Искус-ство, согласно Григорьеву, имеет истоки в самой жизни, а жизнь через искусство реализует себя и сама себя понимает; поэтому критик – также «художник». Бахтин также исходит из принципа корреляции искусства и жизни, выводя отсюда свое понятие «творческий хронотоп». У Григорьева, Бахтина, Достоевского дело идет об онтологии искусства, как и об искусстве онтологии. Искусство онтологии подразумевает самую широкую эстетизацию жизни: ее вдвижение в горизонт искусства. Данная установка – предмодернистская и модернистская. В генезисе понятия «органическая критика» отозвались уроки Канта как автора трех философ-ских «Критик». Идеи Канта были значимы также для Достоевского и Бахтина. Григорьева могло за-интересовать философское измерение, приданное Кантом понятию «критика». Поэтому «органиче-ская критика» относится преимущественно к философии, поднимая объемный перечень вопросов, превышающих собственно эстетические. Согласно Бахтину, полифония Достоевского заключается в том, что автор выступает «медиумом», «пропускающим» через себя различные идеи («голоса» персонажей, различные «точки зрения» и т. п.) Автор-медиум «проводит» «через себя» и «из себя» массу различных идей без сущностного отвержения какой-либо из них. «Автор-медиум» пытается говорить от лица жизни, но также и даже «вместо жизни», что ведет к логической и смысловой подмене «мира» – «картиной мира». Отвер-жение сущностное вовсе не означает отсутствия у автора отвержения формального, т. е. просто констатированного. Однако сущностное неотвержение означает гораздо больше, чем то или иное формальное отвержение. Жизнь, историческое бытие в таком случае оказывается для Достоевского практически «хаосом». В развитие идей Бахтина следует, что при внедрении в свой художественный мир карнавального начала Достоевский утверждает «связку» чувствительность / физиологизм. Ее истоки – в сентимен-тализме XVIII в. Данная «связка» находит религиозную проекцию в феномене юродства. Поэтому итоговой бахтинской трактовкой Достоевского (1963) движет пафос «оправдания» писателя, полно-та художественного мира которого в главном реализована через религиозно трактованную Досто-евским «картину мира» (все-таки «картину мира», но не сам «мир»). Apollon Grigoriev and Bakhtin touched upon quite different issues of Dostoevsky’s work but the correlation between their works is obvious at the level of their metalogic, their philosophy, and their cultural-philosophical foundations. Grigoriev, together with Dostoevsky, was at the origins of “pochvennichestvo” (a grassroots movement), although Grigoriev’s comments on Dostoevsky’s work are episodic and rather injective. Grigoriev basically denied Dostoevsky that his art corresponded to the “truth of life”. But even the first version of Bakhtin’s book about Dostoevsky was not apologetic. Grigoriev and Bakhtin realize their philosophy through aesthetics (philosophy of art). Art, according to Grigoriev, has its origins in life itself, and life through art realizes itself and understands itself; therefore the critic is also an “artist”. Bakhtin also proceeds from the principle of correlation between art and life, deriving from this his concept of “creative chronotope”. Grigoriev, Bakhtin, and Dostoevsky deal with the ontology of art as well as the art of ontology. The art of ontology implies the broadest aestheticization of life: its movement into the horizon of art. This attitude is pre-modern and modern. In the genesis of the concept of “organic criticism”, the lessons of Kant as the author of three philosophical “Critics” could be echoed. Kant’s ideas were also significant for Dostoevsky and Bakhtin. Grigoriev might have been interested in the philosophical dimension that Kant gave to the concept of “criticism”. Therefore, “organic criticism” refers primarily to philosophy, raising a voluminous list of issues that exceed the aesthetic ones themselves. According to Bakhtin, Dostoevsky’s polyphony consists in the fact that the author acts as a “medium”, “passing” various ideas through himself (“voices” of characters, different “points of view”, etc.). The author- medium “conducts” “through himself” and “out of myself” a lot of different ideas without the essential rejection of any of them. The “author-medium” tries to speak on behalf of life but also even “instead of life”, which leads to a logical and semantic substitution of “the world” – “an image of the world”. Essential rejection does not at all mean that the author has no formal rejection, i.e. just stated. Essential non-rejection, however, means much more than any formal rejection. Life, historical being in this case turns out to be practically “chaos” for Dostoevsky. In the development of Bakhtin’s ideas, it follows that, when introducing carnivalization into his artistic world, Dostoevsky affirms a “link” of sensitivity / physiology. The origins of this “link” are in the sentimentalism of the 18th century. This “link” finds a religious projection in the phenomenon of “yurodstvo” (foolishness). Therefore, Bakhtin’s final interpretation of Dostoevsky (1963) is driven by the pathos of the “justification” of the writer, whose integrity of the artistic world is mainly realized through the religious “image of the world” (aft er all, the “image of the world” and not the “world” itself).

Современные исследования и различные подходы к изучению библеизмов в русском языке

In recent decades, in the post-Soviet area, an interest of linguists in religious subjects has been increasing. Linguists undertake a large-scale research on the religious image of the world. Studying the Bible gains in importance, and the attention of many researchers focuses on the multi-facited description of phraseological units of the biblical origin. In contemporary Russian linguistic analyzes, there are two approaches to the study of phraseological expressions of biblical provenance: in accordance with the Russian or western research traditions. Representatives of both fields of study refer in their works to the achievements of Russian or foreign scientists. The resulting studies are typologically diversified. Among them you can find literary, philosophical and linguistic works, articles of historical and cultural character, descriptive and comparative works (created on the basis of material from several languages), experimental dictionary publications and other types of scientific texts. The present article is a presentation of the most important, in my opinion, works on the religious image of the world.

The Global Religious Configuration. Realities and Forecasts

"Based on recent research, we aim to present the current global religious configu-ration, the religious demographic evolution during the twentieth century, and the main trends for the first half of the twenty-first century. From a methodological point of view, we chose to present only those religions that register a share of 1% of the global population, among which we paid increased attention only to Christiani-ty and Islam. The only exception to this rule is Judaism, the reason for advancing this exception being the desire to compare the evolution of the three religions of the Book: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The purpose of this presentation is to provide a more nuanced picture of the geographical distribution of each religion and, on the other hand, to illustrate the global religious diversity. From a chronological point of view, the landmarks are the years 1910, 1970, 2000, 2010, 2014, 2030, and 2050. The data collected for the years 1910–2014 is the basis of the forecasts for the years 2030 and 2050. The former ones describe the religious realities, while the latter two open up perspectives on the trends in religious demography. We would like to draw attention to the potential of religious demography in deciphering the religious image of the world in which we live. On the other hand, we consider that exploring the global religious profile and the way it evolves, as well as the factors that bring forth change, is not only an opportunity generated by the organic development of religious demography research but also a necessity for rethinking the pastoral and missionary strategies of the church. Religious demographics provide valuable data about the past together with nuanced knowledge of the present, helping us anticipate and even influence the future. The church, at any time, assumes the past, manages the present, and prepares the future. From this perspective, we believe that a strategic pastoral thinking, regardless of religion or denomination, can be organically outlined, starting from the data provided through the means available to religious demography. While religious demography provides specific data, it does not explain the phenomena behind this data; it notes and invites questions, debates, and explanations about religious affiliation, religiosity, and religious behaviour. Keywords: religious, demography, agnostics, atheists, Christians, Muslims."

Ex Anatolia Lux: Menorahs from the Synagogue at Sardis

The Sardis Synagogue is a key monument of diaspora Judaism, whose rich visual language runs through its decoration and furnishings. Votive texts, inscribed reliefs, and freestanding lampstands found in the building make clear the central importance of the menorah as a resonant religious image but also a functional object. Differences in material, size, form, and decoration reflect multiple sources for the Sardis menorahs, with imported examples apparently guiding the production of distinctive local versions over two centuries. As a group, they document the diffusion of visual ideas as well as contacts with other Jewish communities in late antiquity.

Heralds of the Resurrection in Russian Art. Through Time

В этом кратком обзоре отдельных произведений русского искусства, посвящённых теме Воскресения Христова, не претендующем на какую-либо полноту, можно наблюдать эволюцию религиозных образов и иконографии в русской изобразительной культуре от Средневековья к XX столетию, которая характеризуется иллюстративным пафосом у передвижников, живописной экспрессией у В. М. Васнецова и утончённым символизмом у М. В. Нестерова, мастеров, также остающихся в рамках реалистической традиции. Знаменательно, что в русском изобразительном искусстве сам момент Воскресения Христова не часто оказывается изображённым, словно потому что и в Священной истории, как известно, это событие произошло скрытым от человеческих глаз. К сокровенной тайне подходили многие известные русские художники, исполнившие удивительные графические эскизы росписей, которые так и остались неосуществлёнными. The article presents some pieces of Russian art dedicated to the theme of Christ’s Resurrection. Although it does not claim to be complete, it illustrates a path of a religious image and iconography in Russian visual culture from the Middle Ages to the XX century from illustrative pathos in the works of saints to V. M. Vasnetsov’s pictorial expression, refined M. V. Nesterov’s symbolism and masters who remained within the framework of a realistic tradition. It is significant that in Russian art the very moment of the Resurrection of Christ is not often depicted, equally as in Gospel, this event was hidden from human eyes. Many famous Russian artists approached the sacred topic having executed amazing graphic sketches of paintings or murals, most of which were never realized.