The experience of intentional and event analysis in modern foreign sociology of art

The article evaluates the experience of using two relatively new methods for modern sociology of art. The need for such a perspective can be explained by the increasing competition between the sociology of art and empirical aesthetics. In such a situation, the review of new strategies in modern art research opens up prospects for their widespread use at the sectoral and interdisciplinary levels. The article discusses event analysis and intentional analysis. The first method allows us to consider art as a set of events (event analysis): it is not the traditional approach to the study of art that is taken into account (for example, the identification of the ideological and artistic or stylistic originality of a work of art), but the demand among recipients, involvement in megaprojects, exhibitions, the creation of sociopolitical connotations, etc. At the same time, events related to art unfold in museums, galleries, on the streets in public places, during other events. The second method is adopted from philosophical phenomenology (Husserl, Brentano) and is a measurement of the moods of society that arise and change from contact with art. At the same time, the key point is the evaluation of the role of art in achieving certain goals - social, political, economic. Compared with traditional methods used in the relevant branch of sociology, these research directions allow us to consider art and its forms as an “empirical field” in which a special role is assigned to the researcher and recipients (informants), and art is regarded as a “standard” object for research along with others. This is how the so-called context is formed - the “new” sociology of art, which is forced to compete with empirical aesthetics, the subject field of which is not the beautiful as the most important criterion for the existence of art, but society, which is able to form the status of the beautiful in art itself due to ideological, religious and other mechanisms. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References