Visualization and Virtualization of Art as New Dimension of Communicative Interaction and Social Management System

3. The heritage of society, which has lost its conventionality, was the awareness of relativity, non-existence of the image, which became the tool of selfexpression, profit, ideological control, and social management.

4. The determination of the elitist avant-garde on the game relation to self-sufficient imagery was extremely democratized and became widespread. The line between high and low art is gradually wearing away. Moreover, reality itself becomes a work of art.

5. Parallel to the improvement of technology, the consumer of a cultural product becomes the producer of content, changing social communication.

6. The number of cultural artifacts that surround contemporary man, convert the real and virtual space around them into a huge gallery of visual images, drawing together everyday life and art.

7. The huge cultural heritage leads to the infinite number of allusions, reminiscences, and self-quotations, which, in its turn, results in the conversion of art into a “spider” that itself weaves a web. Now art is the example and image for reality, not vice versa, as it was before, and a factor in social management.

8. Visualization of culture and its virtualization has both positive and negative consequences: on the one hand, it creates a picture of information chaos in people's minds, intellectual passivity, fragmentation, reproduction of perception, forming consumer and irresponsible attitude to copyright; on the other hand, visualizing activities make it possible to involve the masses of people in the cultural values, to develop their individual cultural needs, including creative ones.

9. As the “art of the object” visualization reaches the highest degree of influence in the practice of product placement, which occupies all spheres of our activity, forming both aesthetic taste and moral and ideological beliefs.

The scientific novelty. The scientific novelty of the research is in the complex substantiation of the demand for a visual image in modern culture, systemic problem solution of breaking boundaries between culture and life (“happening”, “performance”, etc.), high and low in art, the manifestation of new image functions and cultural artifacts, that surround contemporary man, rethinking the cultural heritage, which through allusive and reminiscent images penetrates all spheres of our existence, forming amalgam aesthetic tastes and moral and ideological beliefs. Special attention has been paid to the practice of product placement and the connection between advertising and art, which, together with the above-mentioned surveying, helped to prove the thesis that visual art has actually turned into a system of social management.

The significance of the study. Comprehension of visual culture not only as a means of self-expression and communicative interaction but also as a management system makes it possible to use new approaches to create effective tools for improving the manageability of cultural and ideological processes in the society, especially in today's aggressive media environment.

Prospects for further research. Prospects for further research should be focused on the mechanisms' development used for the population visual literacy formation by means of studying psychological processes involved in visual perception, analysis of intellectual methods which enable interpreting, understanding visual information, and direct using visual images and messages.

References

3. Aleshyna, L. S., Voronina, T. S., & Zolotova, N. Yu. (1999). Evropejskaya Zhivopis ' XIII-XX Veka [European Painting of the XIII-XX Centuries] (V. V. Vanslov et al., Eds.). Moscow: Iskusstvo (in Russ.).

4. Barthes, R. (2010). Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography (R. Howard, Trans. in Fr.). New York: Hill and Wang.

5. Baudrillard, J. (2004). Fragments: Conversations with Francois L'Yvonnet. London; New York: Routledge.

6. Baudrillard, J. (2002). The System of Objects (J. Benedict, Trans. in Fr.). London; New York: Verso.

7. Benjamin, W. (2008). The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility, and Other Writings on Media (M. W. Jennings, Ed.). Cambridge; London: Harvard University Press.

8. Boehm, G., & Mitchell, W. J. T. (2010). Pictoral versus Iconic Turn: Two Letters. The Pictorial Turn (N. Curtis, Ed.). London; New York: Routledge, 8-26.

9. Bryson, N. (1986). Vision andPainting: The Logic of the Gaze. London: Macmillan. Bryson, N. (1988). The Gaze in the Expanded Field. Vision and Visuality (H. Foster, Ed.). Seattle: Bay Press, 86-108.

10. Bryson, N. (2003). Responses to Mieke Bal's “Visual Essentialism and the Object ofVisual Culture”: Visual Culture and the Dearth of Images. Journal of Visual Culture, 2(2), 229-232, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/14704129030022005. Bulgakov, S. N. (1993). Filosofiya Khozyaj stva [Philosophy of Economy]. Sochineniya [Works] (Vol. 1). Moscow: Nauka (in Russ.).

11. Calvino, I. (1993). Six Memos for the Next Millennium. New York: Vintage Books. Comolli, J.-L. (1980). Machines of Visible. The Cinematic Apparatus (S. Heath, & T. de Lauretis, Eds.). New York: St. Martin's Press, 121-142.

12. Crary, J. (1992). Techniques of the Observer: On Vision and Modernity in the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

13. Debord, G. (1995). Society of the Spectacle (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans. in Fr.). New York: Zone Books.

14. Derrida, J. (1987). The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond (A. Bass, Trans. in Fr.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

15. Didi-Huberman, G. (2016). The Surviving Image. Phantoms of Time and Time of Phantoms: Aby Warburg's History of Art (H. Mendelsohn, Trans. in Fr.). University Park: Penn State University Press, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1470412917720443.

16. Foucault, M. (1994). The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage Books.

17. Hadot, P. (2004). What Is Ancient Philosophy? (M. Chase, Trans. in Fr.). Cambridge: Belknap Press.

18. Heidegger, M. (2001). Being and Time (J. Macquarrie, & E. Robinson, Trans. in Germ.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

19. Jameson, F. (1992). Signatures of the Visible. New York; London: Routledge.

20. Jay, M. (2002). Cultural Relativism and the Visual Turn. Journal of Visual Culture, 1(3), 267-278, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/147041290200100301.

21. Khasan, A. (2016). Psykholohiia Reklamy, yak Instrument Formuvannia Yii Efektyvnosti [Psychology of Advertising as a Tool for Shaping Its Effectiveness]. Ekonomika i Rehion [Economy and Region], 2, 48-53 (in Ukr.).

22. Krasil'nikov, I. M., Kritskaya, E. D., & Levin, L. O. (1999). Sovremennyj Slovar'- spravochnikpo Iskusstvu [Contemporary Dictionary and Reference Book of Art] (A. A. Melik-Pashaev, Ed.). Moscow; Nazran: AST, Olimp (in Russ.).

23. Krauss, R. (1996). Welcome to the Cultural Revolution. October (Vol. 77), 83-96, doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/778961.

24. Lacan, J. (2004). Ecrits: A Selection (B. Fink, Trans. in Fr.). New York: WW Norton & Co.

25. Losev, A. F. (1980). Istoriya AntichnojE'stetiki: PozdnijE'llinizm [The History of Ancient Aesthetics: Late Hellenism]. Moscow: Iskusstvo. (in Russ.).

26. Lossky, V. (2017). Orthodox Dogmatic Theology: Creation, God's Image in Man and the Redeeming Work of the Trinity (O. Clйment, & М. Stavrou, Ed.; А. Gythiel, Trans. in Eng.). New York: Saint Vladimir's Seminary Press.

27. Mal'kovskaya, I. A. (2008). Vizual'naya Kul'tura: Problemy Samoidentichnosti [Visual Culture: Problems of Self-identity]. GumanitarnyeNauki: Teoriya iMetodologiya [Humanities: Theory and Methodology], 4, 45-49. (in Russ.).

28. Marcuse, H. (2007). One-Dimensional Man. London; New York: Routledge.

29. Marion, J-L. (2003). The Crossing of the Visible (J. K. A. Smith, Trans. in Fr.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

30. McLuhan, M. (2013). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Berkeley: Gingko Press.

31. Mirzoeff, N. (1999). An Introduction to Visual Culture. New York: Routledge.

32. Mitchell, W. J. T. (1994). Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

33. Moxey, K. (2008). Visual Studies and the Iconic Turn. Journal of Visual Culture, 7(2), 131-146, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1470412908091934.

34. Panofsky, E. (1983). Meaning in the Visual Arts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

35. Reeves, R. (1970). Reality in Advertising. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

36. Ries, A., & Trout, J. (2001). Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.

37. Savchuk, V. V. (2005). Filosofiya Fotografii [Philosophy of Photography]. St. Petersburg: Izdatel'stvo Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta (in Russ.).

38. Sonin, L. (2005, January 8). Neyavnye Funktsii Reklamy [Implicit Advertising Functions], Retrieved from https://www.show-media-art.ru/articles/1/44_ 2.shtml (in Russ.).

39. Sontag, S. (2001). On Photography. New York: Picador.

40. State Statistics Service of Ukraine (2021, January 1). Chyselnist Naiavnoho Nase- lennia Ukrainy na 1 Sichnia 2021 Roku [Number of Present Population of Ukraine, as of January 1] (M. Timonina, Ed.), Retrieved from http://database. ukrcensus.gov.ua/PXWEB2007/ukr/publ_new1/2021/zb_chuselnist% 202021.pdf (in Ukr.).

41. Tlostanova, M. V. (2004). Postsovetskaya Literatura i Estetika Transkul'turaczii. Zhit' Nikogda, Pisat' Niotkuda [Post-Soviet Literature and the Aesthetics ofTransculturalism. Live Never, Write From Nowhere]. Moscow: Tipografiya OOO Rokhos, 87-88 (in Russ.).

42. Virilio, P. (1996). The Vision Machine (J. Rose, Trans. in Fr.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

43. Virilio, P. (2001). Speed and Information: Cyberspace Alarm! Reading Digital Culture (D. Trend, Ed.). Malden; Oxford: Blackwell, 23-27.

44. Wilson, L. (2001). Cyberwar, God and Television. An interview with Virilio. Digital Delirium (A. Kroker, & M. Kroker, Eds.). Montreal: New Word Perspectives, 43-44.

45. Zizek, S. (1999). Cyberspace, or the Unbearable Closure of Being. Endless Night: Cinema and Psychoanalysis, Parallel Histories (J. Bergstrom, Ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press, 123.

Размещено на Allbest