Slika i moć : predstava vladara u srpskoj vizuelnoj kulturi 19. i početkom 20. veka

Abstract

Smeštanje vladarske slike u sistem srpske vizuelne kulture 19. veka podrazumevalo je poštovanje zakonitosti medijske reprezentacije koja je važila širom Evrope. Funkcionisanje vladarske slike pratili smo tokom dugog devetnaestog veka, od početka Francuske revolucije do praskozorja Prvog svetskog rata. U tako uokvirenom vremenskom prostoru, posmatrali smo život vladarskih slika vezanih za dve srpske dinastije: Obrenović i Karađorđević. Postavljanjem vladarske slike u korpus vizuelne kulture, otvorili smo mogućnost da se one valorizuju izvan suve estetske kategorizacije. Performativnost i akciona telesnost vladarskog lika omogućile su da se u određenim segmentima rada fokusiramo i na vladarevu taktilnu i prezentnu sliku. Ipak, vladarska slika je, uprkos mnogobrojnim specifičnostima, prevashodno definisana kao veštački uobličena predstava (portret, skultptura, fotografija...). Moguća, apsolutna samodovoljnost vladarske slike otkrivena je kao paradoksalni nedostatak, budući da je ostala sputana određenim graničnim strukturama i nametnutim sistemima reprezentacije. Njena unutrašnja moć, u napetosti sa spoljašnjim okolnostima, otkrivala se tokom istraživačkog procesa, odredivši limite snage vladarske slike. U procesu istraživanja pokazala se potreba za poimanjem vladarske slike kao transistorijskog simbola - prepoznatljivog na nivou strukturalne sličnosti - koji se potom dodatno istorizovao i konkurentno nadmetao sa ograničavajućim krugovima javnosti. Vladarska slika je postala istorijski znak, agens društvene komunikacije, kao i vizuelni nosilac heurističke vrednosti. Njena kritička i istorijska vrednost vizuelizovane su govornim, literarnim, alegorijskim i performativnim jezikom, tvoreći strategije reprezentacije u okviru politika umetnosti. Odsustvo metodološke unisonosti u sagledavanju vladarskih slika posledica je poštovanja različitosti vizuelne građe. Uprkos pluralizmu metoda, donekle je naglašena metodološka aparatura svojstvena političkoj ikonografiji, čija je pretpostavljena interdisciplinarnost omogućila dešifrovanje koordinatnog sistema vladarskih slika. Vera u dominaciju sadržaja vladarske slike poništila je eventualnu kodifikaciju ikonografski određenih vladarskih tipova, što je doprinelo da vladarske slike vežemo u značenjski sistem okruženja. Istovremeno, njihova forma nije u potpunosti ostala na margini, budući da je estetsko građenje vladarske slike (forma, boja, materijal) umnogome određeno njenim inscenatorskim i apelativnim karakterom. Konačno, vladarske slike i njihova saznajna vrednost rezultat su interaktivnog i komunikacijskog procesa. Njihova moć samorefleksije usmerena je ka trećem licu, bilo da je u pitanju umetnik-kreator, adresat ili naknadni istraživač. Tako je izveden zaključak da moć vladarske slike leži u energetskim efektima, koji ih čine prepoznatljivim i aktivnim činiocima u jednom relativno logički postavljenom medijskom sistemu.

The induction of the ruler’s image into the system of Serbian visual culture of the 19th century implied the respect for legitimacy of media representation that had been applied across Europe. We have followed the functioning of the ruler’s image during the long 19th century which had lasted from the beginning of the French Revolution to the dawn of the World War II. Within this historically framed time span we have followed the life of ruler’s images involving two Serbian ruling dynasties: the Obrenovics and the Karadjordjevics. By placing the image of the ruling body into the ground of visual culture, we have discovered that it could be valorized beyond the pure aesthetic categorization. The performativity and bodily activeness of the ruler’s image allowed us to focus also on his tactile and present image in certain areas of our study. Nevertheless, in spite of all peculiarities, the ruler’s image is mainly defined as the artificial representation (portrait, sculpture, photography…). Possible, absolute self-sufficiency of the ruler’s image was revealed here as a paradoxical shortcoming, since it remained tied to certain margin structures and the imposed systems of representation. Its internal power in tension with the external circumstances had been appearing throughout the entire research process and it determined the power limit of ruler’s image. During the research process we found it necessary to perceive the ruler’s image as a transhistorical symbol recognizable at the level of structural similarity that eventually was additionally historized and competitively imposed to the limited public circles. The ruler’s image has become a historical sign, the agent of social communication, and also the visual carrier of heuristic significance. Its critical and historical value is visualized via oral, literary, allegorical, performative… language, creating the strategies of representation within arts politics. The absence of methodological uniformity in our consideration of ruler’s images came as the consequence of respect for diversity of visual material. Regardless of methodological pluralism, we have slightly accented research methods that are typically related to the political iconography and its presumed interdisciplinarity had allowed us to decode the ruler’s images coordinate system. The faith in the supremacy of the ruler’s image contents had cancelled the eventual codification of ichnographically specific ruler’s types that, consequently, allowed us to tie the ruler’s images into the semantic system. At the same time, their form wasn’t entirely marginalized since the aesthetic creation of the ruler’s image (form, color, material…) is largely defined by its appellative inscenation character. Finally, the ruler’s images and their cognitive values are the results of interactive and communication processes. Their power of selfreflection is directed toward the third person no matter if that is artist-creator, addressee or subsequent researcher. As a consequence, it was concluded that the power of ruler's images lies in the energetic effects, which makes them distinctive and active factors in a relatively logically set media system.