Collage as the basis of creative methodology of Sergey Paradzhanov

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru

Kharkiv State Academy of Design and Arts, Kharkiv, Ukraine

Collage as the basis of creative methodology of Sergey Paradzhanov

V. Tarasov

N. Markhaichuk

M. Konieva

In this article we have analyzed the artistic features of S. Paradzhanov's art. We have investigated the interaction of Paradzhanov's cinematic works with his collages. Analysis of creative work of S. Paradzhanov suggests that the master deliberately abandons a number of opportunities provided by the director of traditional cinematic language, manifesting such an “screen painting”. Analysis of films, artworks and screenplays by S. Paradzhanov allowed us to identify three main features of his collage tools: 1) work with color and visionary elements; 2) features of visual representation of texts; 3) textures and volumes of images in the frame. Collage techniques have a number of purely visual properties, which are reproduced in different ways in cinematic artistic background. It is likely that S. Paradzhanov, fully aware of this peculiarity, emphasized certain qualitative features of the collage technique, achieving the desired effect in the frame.

That is why, in our opinion, Paradzhanov's collage could exist only within the framework of author's cinema in the aesthetics of Soviet art. Postmodernist thinking came to Soviet art through author's cinema, where S. Paradzhanov was one of the key figures. Keywords: collage, S. Paradzhanov, author's cinema, postmodernism. paradzhanov cinematic collage

Â. Â. Òàðàñîâ, Í. Â. Ìàðõàé÷óê, Ì. Êîíºâà. Êîëàæ ÿê îñíîâà òâîð÷î¿ ìåòîäîëî㳿 Ñåðã³ÿ Ïàðàäæàíîâà

Àêòóàëüí³ñòü. Òðèâàëèé ÷àñ ñïàäîê Ïàðàäæà- íîâà-ìèòöÿ òà Ïàðàäæàíîâà-ðåæèñåðà îñìèñëþâàâñÿ îêðåìî. Íàòîì³ñòü õóäîæíÿ é ê³íåìàòîãðàô³÷íà ñêëàäîâ³ òâîð÷îãî ãåí³ÿ Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâà ìàþòü íå ëèøå ñï³ëüíå êîð³ííÿ, àëå é áàãàòî ð³çíèõ òî÷îê ïåðåòèíó. Ó ê³íîêàðòèíàõ ðåæèñåðà êëþ÷îâó ðîëü â³ä³ãðຠïðåäìåò-ð³÷, ÿêèé íå ëèøå íåñå ôóíêö³îíàëüíå íàâàíòàæåííÿ, àëå é íàä³ëåíèé äîäàòêîâèì (ïåðåâàæíî àñîö³àòèâíèì) ñåíñîì.

Ìåòà ñòàòò³ -- çä³éñíèòè àíàë³ç ôåíîìåíîëî㳿 êîëàæó Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâà ÿê àâòîðñüêî¿ àðòïðàêòè- êè, ùî ïðîíèçóº ÿê õóäîæí³, òàê ³ ê³íåìàòîãðàô³÷í³ ðîáîòè ìèòöÿ.

Ìåòîäîëîã³ÿ. Àâòîðàìè çàñòîñîâàíî: 1) êîìïàðàòèâíèé ìåòîä àíàë³çó, äëÿ ôîðìóâàííÿ ñèñòåìè ïîð³âíÿííÿ îáðàçîòâîð÷èõ òà ê³íåìàòîãðàô³÷íèõ òâîð³â ìèòöÿ; 2) ôîðìàëüíî-ñòèë³ñòè÷íèé òà êîìïîçèö³éíî-ïëàñòè÷íèé ìåòîäè, äëÿ âèÿâëåííÿ é ³íòåðïðåòàö³¿ êëþ÷îâèõ êîìïîíåíò³â õóäîæíüî¿ ìîâè Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâà.

Ðåçóëüòàòè. Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâ ñâ³äîìî â³äìîâëÿºòüñÿ â³ä áàãàòüîõ ìîæëèâîñòåé, ÿêèõ íàäຠðåæèñåðîâ³ òðàäèö³éíà ê³íåìàòîãðàô³÷íà ìîâà, ìàí³ôåñòóþ÷è îáðàçîòâîð÷ó ìåòîäîëîã³þ îïîâ³ä³ ÿê êëþ÷îâó äëÿ àâòîðñüêîãî «åêðàííîãî æèâîïèñó».  åñòåòèö³ ðàäÿíñüêîãî ìèñòåöòâà êîëàæ Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâà ì³ã ³ñíóâàòè ëèøå â ðàìêàõ àâòîðñüêîãî ê³íåìàòîãðàôó. Ïîñòìîäåðí³ñòñüêå ìèñëåííÿ ïîòðàïëÿëî äî ðàäÿíñüêîãî ìèñòåöòâà, çîêðåìà, ÷åðåç àâòîðñüêå ê³íî, äå îäí³ºþ ç êëþ÷îâèõ ô³ãóð áóâ Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâ.

Íîâèçíà. Ó ïóáë³êàö³¿ ïî-íîâîìó ðîçêðèâàºòüñÿ ðîëü òà ì³ñöå êîëàæíèõ çàñîá³â âèðàçíîñò³ â õóäîæí³é ìîâ³ àâòîðñüêîãî ê³íåìàòîãðàôó Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâà.

Ïðàêòè÷íå çíà÷åííÿ. Ìàòåð³àëè ³ ðåçóëüòàòè ðîçâ³äêè ìîæóòü áóòè êîðèñíèìè ÿê äëÿ àêàäåì³÷íîãî âèêîðèñòàííÿ, òàê ³ ó äèäàêòè÷í³é ïëîùèí³.

Âèñíîâêè. Àíàë³ç ê³íîñòð³÷îê, õóäîæí³õ òâîð³â òà ñöåíàðíèõ ìàòåð³àë³â Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâà äîçâîëèâ âèîêðåìèòè òðè ãîëîâí³ îñîáëèâîñò³ éîãî êîëàæíîãî ³íñòðóìåíòàð³þ: 1) ðîáîòà ç êîëüîðîì òà â³ç³îí³ñòèêà; 2) îñîáëèâîñò³ â³çóàëüíî¿ ðåïðåçåíòàö³¿ òåêñò³â; 3) ôàêòóðè òà îá'ºìè çîáðàæåíü ó êàäð³. Ïðèéîìè êîëàæóâàííÿ ìàþòü íåìàëî ñóòî îáðàçîòâîð÷èõ âëàñòèâîñòåé, ÿê³ ïî-ð³çíîìó â³äòâîðþþòüñÿ â ê³íåìàòîãðàô³÷íîìó õóäîæíüîìó òë³. ʳíåìàòîãðàô Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâà º îðãàí³÷íîþ ÷àñòèíîþ éîãî îáðàçîòâîð÷î¿ ôåíîìåíîëî㳿, ÿêà

íàáóâຠð³çíèõ ñèñòåì ðåïðåçåíòàö³¿ â äåê³ëüêîõ ïàðàëåëüíèõ âèäîâèõ òà æàíðîâèõ ïàðàäèãìàõ ìèñòåöòâà.

Êëþ÷îâ³ ñëîâà: êîëàæ, Ñ. Ïàðàäæàíîâ, àâòîðñüêèé ê³íåìàòîãðàô, ïîñòìîäåðí³çì.

The scientific topicality of the research topic. For a long time, the legacy of Paradzhanov as an artist and Paradzhanov as a director was understood separately from each other. In recent decades, due to development of various fields of humanities (culturology, art history, philosophy), researchers have been increasingly pointing out that artistic and cinematic components of creative genius of S. Paradzhnov have not only common roots but also many different points of intersection. According to S. Paradzhanov himself, in cinematographic practice he often turned to “pictorial solution but not literary one”. “I was always addicted to painting and had long been accustomed to the fact that I perceived the frame as an independent painting. I know that my direction willingly dissolves in painting, and this is probably its first weakness and first strength” (Paradzhanov, 2012). Later in the same essay “Eternal Movement” S. Paradzhanov admitted that was why “I constantly take the brush, so I gladly communicate with artists, composers than with my work colleagues. A different system of thinking opens up to me, different ways of perceiving and reflecting life. That's when you feel that cinema is a synthetic art” (Paradzhanov, 2012).

Probably, S. Paradzhanov was close to the thinking expressed by Andre Malraux (thanks to A. Bazen) in one of the issues of the French magazine “Verve”, according to which “cinema is just the most developed aspect of pictorial realism, the principle of which arose in Renaissance and found its fullest expression in Baroque painting” (Cited by: Bazen, 1972, ð.40). It is known that S. Paradzhanov was the “director who was painting”, which is not an absolute novelty in the world of cinema. However, his early drawings and sketches go beyond the usual working framing. He was thinking while drawing. Therefore, we agree with popular opinion expressed by the researcher L. Lukashova back in 2009 that “the key to an adequate analysis of the phenomenon of S. Paradzhanov is to consider all aspects of his work as a single paradigm, it should be considered as a part of culturology, but not in the context of “pure” art history and film studies” (Lukashova, 2009, p. 124).

Collage is of particular importance in this aspect of the analysis of the legacy of S. Paradzhanov. Collage is the use and comparison of different shapes, textures, colors and pieces of different materials within one plane or beyond the plane, which as a result form a certain compositional and artistic unity. It is well known that “papiers colles” (“glued papers” technique) by J. Braque sets the direction for a new type of artistic thinking, which in the second half of the XX century is at the forefront of discussions between academic art environment and art practice of “contemporary art”. Thus, G. Rosenberg in the work “The Dedefinition of Art; action art to pop to earthworks” (1972) almost for the first time formulates one of the leading art trends of the second half of the XX century about understanding collage as an art practice from a specific organization of external space, in which the artist presents the world around him in all its limits and manifestations, or even captures (and represents) it without changes (Rosenberg, 1972).

From the mid-1960's S. Paradzhanov realized special role of collages in his own creative process. According to T. Simyan, “collages, graphics, applications were breaths of fresh air and static frames of cinema for him” when repressive Soviet government stole from Paradzhanov 10 years of creativity in filmmaking (Simyan, 2019, p. 209). It is then that his specific manner of “playing” certain elements of action or visual representation of the image through artistic possibilities of the collage took shape. From the texts of S. Paradzhanov and testimonies of his friends and colleagues it is well known that the master was especially attached not only to collage as a format of artistic creativity (he often sold his collages as author's “hand-made” art giving them the status of a true artwork). He was tied to the principle of collage both in scripting process and during filmmaking and film editing.

However, in Soviet art of the 1960s and 1970s, collage as a phenomenon of postmodernism, with its specific associativity, intertextuality, and “visual metalanguage” was not considered as a “serious” artistic practice. The Soviet artistic community not only did not know Paradzhanov the artist, but also denied the very possibility of such “knowledge”. However, the collage, which was unacceptable for Soviet culture became the basis of creative method of Paradzhanov the director. He described a collage as a “compressed film”. It is thanks to “collage thinking” that Paradzhanov the director tended to create a “cultural collage” by means of cinematography -- a cultural “text” that does not reflect reality, but creates a new reality (or many new realities)” (Lukashova, 2009, p. 128). And the object-thing plays the leading role in the creation of such a “cultural collage”.

It is important to emphasize that in the films of S. Paradzhanov the key role is often played by the object-thing, which not only carries a functional load, but also it is endowed with additional (mostly associative) meaning. Things and objects as signs, symbols and allegories of feelings make up emotional and semantic palette of S. Paradzhanov. Probably, it is the multilayered nature of these meanings that forms what modern researchers often refer to as “collage montage”, which requires the viewer to perceive such objective (or “materialized”) meaningful images consciously. As a mature master S. Paradzhanov remembered the words of I. Savchenko, who was his teacher, an outstanding film director, art director of Gorky Film Studio (Moscow): “People who think in associations get tired pretty fast...” (See: Paradzhanov, 2012). However, S. Paradzhanov was not frightened by this truth, but inspired creative achievements, forming “Paradzhanov's syncretism”. And often it is his Life, which often resembled confusing puzzles from fragments of the real “I” (“Mine”, “Our”) and the imposed social “We” (for S. Paradzhanov “They” as “not -- I”). According to R. Angaladyan, “the world within his artistic consciousness comes into conflict with reality, whatever that reality may be. Such is his mechanism of isolation, such is his immunity of survival and that is his way as a creator. It is through this conflict that he receives the energy of mobilization, the energy of creation. This was his daily battle with reality. With the destruction of this country and this real world, his resistance, the system of immunity built by him is also destroyed” (Angaladyan, 2001).

Problem statement. Researchers know the history of relationship between the collage art and cinema, which originates in artistic practices of the avant-garde of the first half of the XX century. Thereby, it is appropriate to consider the legacy of S. Paradzhanov in two aspects.

Analysis of collages as the author's art practice (as a matter of conceptual significance, within which Paradzhanov's attraction to the world of things forms the specifics of his creative method, which permeates both artistic and cinematic works of the artist). The connection between the collage art and cinematographic practice of S. Paradzhanov in this aspect can be traced in the formal, stylistic and compositional dimensions, as covered in earlier publications (See: Markhaichuk, Tarasov, 2018). As in previous works and now, we completely agree with the opinion of O. Petrova that collages “are an essential manifestation of the artist's worldview and his creative methodology” (Petrova, 1999, p. 209).

Understanding of collage as one of the techniques of cinematic language, which is used at different stages of filmmaking and has instrumental significance (as one of the possible options for solving a script or action-drama task). In this case, the collages are a kind of drafts, a visual record of the future storyboard. Well-known series of collages by S. Paradzhanov should be noted. They are sketches to the synopses of planned films or a part of “texture search” for the films “Sayat-Nova” (“The Color of Pomegranates”, 1968), “Legend of Suram Fortress” (1984) `Ashik -- Kerib” (1988), “Confession” (1989) and others. This feature is especially pronounced in the joint work of S. Paradzhanov and O. Dzhanshiev “Legend of Suram Fortress”, where field photography was used for creation of a collage and a sketch synopsis.

In both outlined aspects of S. Paradzhanov's legacy the complexity lies not only in special manner of “Paradzhanov's syncretism.” According to S. Yutkevich cinematography, which used “editing” and “photographic nature” as elements of artistic language from its very beginning was in a special relationship with “collage” and not related to painting. In fact, collage enters cinema bypassing the practice of traditional image creation (Yutkevych, 1978, p. 222). Finally, identified aspects are to some extent correlated with the concepts of “collage” / “collage thinking”, when the first (collage) acts as a “plastic technique, a method which has clearly defined boundaries” (collage ends where the work departs from the plane beginning and acquires volume), and the second (collage thinking), having a wider range of manifestations, “includes modernist technique of mechanical planar collage and extends to postmodern media installations” (Angaladyan, 2001, p. 169). It is important to emphasize that the films created by S. Paradzhanov within the author's creative methodology, as well as his collages, according to O. Petrova, are “Texts”, which have meanings of our lives, through his “Texts” we know ourselves. These meanings open dualistically: as eternal -- archetypal and as instantaneous enlightenment. In

“Texts” by S. Paradzhanov we plunge into the flow of traditional experience, while remaining on the cutting edge of the acute experience of individual existence” (Petrova, 1999, pp. 210-211).

Analysis of the research and publications. In our opinion, the concept of film semantics of Y. Lotman should be considered as a theoretical basis of our approach. “Semiotics of cinema and issues of film aesthetics” by Y. Lotman was published in 1973. That is, at a time when films of Paradzhanov already existed as an integral part of Soviet auteur cinema. Y. Lotman analyzes the models of “transformation of things into a visual image”, trying to explain how objects of the material world, shown by means of painting, graphics or cinema are transformed into signs that can be perceived and “read” by the viewer (Lotman, 1973, pp. 21-22). We notice similar visual ideas in the films of S. Paradzhanov, especially in the works, which the director himself conditionally refers to film collages. For example, in the films “Kyiv Frescoes” (1966), “The Color of Pomegranates” and others in addition to film semantics of Y. Lotman, the original theoretical explanation of collage constructions in cinema is provided by modern researcher D. Galkin, who comprehends the levels of “techno-artistic hybridization” of art. From his point of view, it is the “formation of hybrid forms” of art that is, the combination of “artistic creativity and technology” provides the basis for a qualitative analysis of the artwork language which is basically composite and synthetic. Visual aesthetics of the camera and editing, a certain “machine process” of creativity allow you to release artistic field of the film from the narrative component (Galkin, 2007, pp. 43-44).

Nowadays culturological approach in understanding of creative legacy of S. Paradzhanov is the leading one. Modern researchers are increasingly choosing interdisciplinary approaches in holistic analysis of the legacy of Paradzhanov the director and Paradzhanov the artist. The publications of the Armenian researcher T. Simyan “Sergey Paradzhanov as a text: man, habit, interior (based on visual texts)” (Simyan, 2019), the Romanian researcher E. Dulgheru “Sergey Paradzhanov and Tengiz Abuladze: two Models of Anticommunist Testimony through Cinema in Soviet Georgia” (Dulgheru, 2014), and a number of texts by such Ukrainian researchers as V. Demeshchenko (Demeshchenko, 2017), O. Petrova (Petrova, 2015), O. Yamborko (Yamborko, 2014) etc. are highly revealing.

The vector of understanding of S. Paradzhanov's artistic activity as the basis of the author's cinematographic style chosen by us is one of the dominant ones during the last two decades. In particular, the works of R. Angaladyan “Paradzhanov: a collage of shadows and colors in the range of one human heart” (Angaladyan, 2001), A. Lukashova “Creativity of S. Paradzhanov as a phenomenon of postmodernism” (Lukashova, 2009), K. Tsereteli “Collage in the background of a self-portrait. Life is a Game” (Tsereteli, 2008), collective articles “Collage of Sergey Paradzhanov: features of the creativity periodization” and “Formal, stylistic and compositional features of collages by Sergey Paradzhanov” (Markhaychuck, Tarasov, 2018) etc. are important in this regard. In addition, modern Ukrainian researcher O. Petrova believes that Paradzhanov's synthesis of creating his own “spiritual landscape” is “a bright example of processing the banalities of life into emotional poetics of films and collages” (Petrova, 2015, p. 106). Director A. Tarkovsky gave a similar description of collage thinking to S. Paradzhanov emphasizing that “collages, dolls, hats, drawings” are not just “design”, but it becomes “much more talented, developed and real art”, the beauty of which lies in immediacy (See: Bezmenova, 2005, p. 338).

The purpose of the article is to determine the features of the “collage tools” of the master in his creative methodology.

Presentation of the main material. S. Paradzhanov uses collage as a technique in various cinematic planes. The arsenal of his specific incarnations and combinatorics with other traditional elements of artistic language of cinema is so rich that some researchers of the master's work put a question about the presence of cinematic language in the style of Paradzhanov, because his films “represent the apogee of painting on the screen” (Demeshchenko, 2015, p. 96). Analysis of films, artworks and screenplays by S. Paradzhanov allows us to identify three main features of the “collage tools” of the master: 1) work with color and visionary elements (models of color perception); 2) features of the author's visual representation of texts; 3) textures and volumes of images in the frame.

Work with color and visionary elements. The color scheme of the film is one of the leading creative tasks for Paradzhanov the director. In particular, in the above-mentioned essay “Eternal Movement” S. Paradzhanov reflected: “Today we filmmakers need for such teachers as Bruegel, Arkhipov, Nesterov, Korin, Leger, and Rivera. We need to learn also from primitivists. For them color was not only a mood, an additional emotion, but a part of the content. In essence, we are talking about the whole pictorial culture, which is foolish to consider as a kind of costume or decoration, but which in itself is meaningful and ideological” (Paradzhanov, 2012). It should be reminded that the most famous film “Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors” (1965) by S. Paradzhanov won the first international prize for the use of color of the plot. However, “Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors” is only one of the most notable cases in the history of Paradzhanov cinema.

A textbook example of the master's visionism is the film adaptation of fairy tale “Ashik-Kerib” (1988) by M. Lermontov, which finally defined the range of key techniques of Paradzhanov, manifesting color as a constructive element, and the plot as a colorful fable, built by pictorial and collage means. It is not difficult to be convinced that “Ashik-Kerib” has practically no color vocabulary, except for the mention of “gold” and “white” colors. But, thanks to detailed comparisons and refined syntax, the reader has the illusion of color saturation of the text, which S. Paradzhanov provokes by “excessive color, pouring over the edge” (Zvereva, 2014, p. 36).

The collage principle of Paradzhanov's aesthetics extends as far as the artistic logic of the author's idea permits. For example, in the early film “Ukrainian Rhapsody” (1961) academic singing plays the role of a constructive element of color (performed by E. Miroshnichenko) (Kabka, 2013, p. 220), which creates a kind of integrity of fragments, differently solved by purely cinematic means.

Collage visionism of S. Paradzhanov also provokes a critical analysis by researchers who note “extra color detail” of a number of the master's films, in particular “Legends of Suram Fortress” (1984). Thus, the diversity of individual episodes of the film is organized by color solutions, which within the overall visual whole (along with the subject fragmentation, emphasis on everyday and “random” things) take the form of an illustrative collage. Let us recall M. Bleiman's accurate description of the film professionals of the poetic school and, in particular, S. Paradzhanov: “... The spectator is forced to perceive one art by perceiving another. The viewer comes to watch the film but he is invited to view the frescoes. What is only guessed and assumed in the films of other masters of the “school”, here this idea is brought to the limit. The connection of individual frames- pictures can be carried out only in the audience's consciousness, but not in the real movement of the plot. The viewer must compare some pictures, and only then their connection, commonality and unity of depicted process will be clear... Visual expressiveness of the “school” films is redirected to its picturesque origins” (Bleiman, 1973, p. 523). It is this phenomenon that allows O. Dulgheru, the Romanian researcher of the creativity of S. Paradzhanov to comprehend the master's cinema as “visual poetry” (Dulgheru, 2014, p. 213).

Features of visual representation of texts. S. Paradzhanov uses collage in the representation of texts of films (screenplays, dialogues of characters, behind-the-scenes texts, texts of musical songs, etc.). From the point of view of a number of researchers from the very fact of its formation in the early XX century collage focuses on modeling of new formats of creativity. The evolution of this technique in cinema is associated with the study of texts space through the use of multilevel cultural “quotes” as a “collage of cultural and semiotic codes”, the combinatorics of which forms new semantic qualities of the work (Erokhin, 2009, p. 80).

It is interesting to note a certain change in narrative strategy in the work of S. Paradzhanov. The early film “Andriesh” (1954) is based on a poetic word and according to O. Bryukhovetskaya generally it is “literary-centric”. There is a rather complex fragmentation of the text (division into short stories) is seen in the film “Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors”. But in the picture “Sayat-Nova” (1968) and the subsequent work of S. Paradzhanov, the text is based solely on visual images. Thinking with “frames-images” is typical for films of S. Paradzhanov, the characteristic feature is the method of taking the image in a “frame”, emphasizing its integral autonomous structure.

In fact, the master creates a text from fragments of different cultural and semiotic codes. This aesthetics is first manifested in “Kyiv Frescoes” (1966) and the documentary “Hakob Hovnatanyan” (1967), which, in fact, shows the transformation “mechanics” of the frame into an image: taking characters into a frame, a reference to painting, which becomes a sign of pictorialism, etc. This delineation is the definition of depicted picture as an image, as coding of meaningful information.

In addition, it should be pointed out that the vast majority of S. Paradzhanov's scripts are a collage of text excerpts and fragments of the synopsis, which is sometimes unfolded by the director towards event description, or remains within improvisational sketch. For example, the script of unfinished fresco film (according to the author's definition) “Kyiv Frescoes” (authors: S. Paradzhanov and P. Zagrebelny) consists of ten “Frescoes”, each of which has appropriate numbering. (It should be noted that the Italian word “fresco” means “fresh”). In fact, “frescoes” are rather “picturesque sketches” and give a fairly conventional idea of the action in the frame, although we know for sure that “The place of action is Kiev. // May 9, 1965 is the Time of action” (Paradzhanov, 2006). “S. Paradzhanov chose a difficult way to create his screenplay: he actually returned to original syncretism and sought to merge two types of art in one text that is literature with painting, dared to embody his idea in a kind of frescoes as a “monumental creation” (Nikoryak, 2013, p. 352). In “Kyiv Frescoes” S. Paradzhanov practically unfolds monumental component of “frescoes” through collage thinking by cinematic means: each of the “Frescoes” is a part of a certain cycle and unfolds as a frieze composition, which encourages the viewer to “read” them as a text following the actions. This principle is one of the most archaic. You can see a kind of “cinema inside out”, because the movement takes place in space along the image that is, the viewer moves but not the image. Unlike classical easel painting, which conveys a situation, state or moment, a fresco can “mount” different events in one plot, and in contrast to an easel painting, it is long in time and space. It should be noted that S. Paradzhanov actually became the first director to use the genre of fresco film in domestic cinema.

A similar fragmentation of the script is typical for the screenplay “Confession” (1969, with subsequent additions), which was also not realized (but S. Paradzhanov started working in 1990). The text of the script can be considered as a completely independent art work: within each episode (recallection) associative sketches of S. Paradzhanov seem to be “glued” to visual solutions (Paradzhanov, 2006). The script of the film “Legends of Suram Fortress” (1984) is similarly built, which is again formed from a number of symbols, images and folklore principles. Thus, in each of these screenplays, as in all other intermedia works, “the text appears as a kind of “information generator” capable of storing various codes, transforming received messages and generating new ones” (Nikoryak, 2013, p. 351).

Textures and image volumes in the frame. Collage techniques have a number of purely visual properties, which are reproduced in different ways in cinematic artistic field. According to R. Gevorkyants, S. Paradzhanov “knew everything and saw all the nuances in the distance” (Gevorkyants, 2013), he was aware of the importance of material, texture of objects in collages, and he used these collage possibilities to achieve the desired effect in the frame (Klochko, 2013; Markhaichuk, Tarasov, formal, stylistic... 2018). At the same time, his ingenuity in the search for an object-thing to create compositions (both collages and cinematographic frames) is really impressive. It is difficult to disagree with O. Petrova, she considers that “each composition of S. Paradzhanov is a stringing of many associative signs on one emotional axis. A “new artistic reality” is born from this game, with the change of semantic steps that is “Paradzhanov's metaphors with inherent uncertainty and mystery” (Petrova, 1999, p. 210).

For example, both multi-figured compositions and numerous still-lives in the frames of “Legends of Suram Fortress” (1984) are static: “white doves are on yellow fabric. Red ribbon is between them. There are two dogs on the carpet next to hemp and saber: spotted black and white and strawcolored dogs. A handful of golden coins, a lamp and scales can be seen. Black and white felt boots. Cinematographic shots, built according to the laws of the canvas are in front of us, where the movement of the viewer's thought is possible only within a clearly constructed composition. The static frames of S. Paradzhanov's film are designed for close and conscious contemplation” (Eliseeva, 2011, p. 103).

Asimilarconceptualsolutionisusedbythemaster in the film “Ashik-Kerib”, based on the principle of “randomness” of the frame. As previously noted, visual constructions of S. Paradzhanov are verified in this picture “according to strict laws of painting”, and the main instrumental task is to overcome the volume of the frame image, which is further achieved by transforming the inherent dynamics of cinema into statics (Zvereva, 2014, p. 36). Collage manifests itself at the level of a holistic vision of individual scenes that change in a planar structure as paintings on the gallery walls.

The plasticity of subject-spatial environment, which reaches its maximum expressiveness due to the tools of collage, bricolage and pastiche redefined by the possibilities of cinematic language is a separate element of the textured vision of the mise-en-scene for S. Paradzhanov. For example, in the film “The Color of Pomegranates”, the collage assemblage located in the background in relation to central figure of the character contains moving elements (“dancing doll”), which give the rhythm of the mise-en-scene. In the films of the 1980s, the master uses several techniques familiar to his manner: overlaying the frame, breaking the scene into several parts; formation of a planar assemblage from the subject environment of characters etc.

S. Paradzhanov is extremely active in using the so-called “Texture of silence”. It is a linguistically undiscovered language of the corporeal world, which is provided to the viewer in visual and auditory perception, as well as tactile and motor experience (Confederate, 2008, p. 82). This texture is directly related to the collage experiments of the master, because in contrast to the “silent” painting, the film potentially has powerful audio capabilities. Their conscious disregard, or on the contrary the use of characteristic sound accents and pauses form the material world of the frame by cinematic means, creating a metaphorical structure of the artwork.

“Metaphorical nature of his understanding of art and significance of his thinking come from the hyperbolization of one or more themes, plots, objects of the world analyzed by him which each time became the supporting structures of his artistic vision. The power of his verified but associative analysis, his logic from the point of view of the real world or social realism was unconvincing. However, in the system built by his imagination, his sensory-associative logic, his sensory-contemplative series of eyesight were perfect” (Angaladyan, 2001).

In an interview with a German radio journalist, S. Paradzhanov himself linked this feature of the texture of his own cinematic language to several circumstances at once: “Why don't the characters of my films talk? Indeed, it seems that they are all deaf and dumb. But in painting, as you know, the characters look at each other and do not talk. ... My films are as dumb as painting” (Cited by: Katanyan, 1994, pp. 98-99). Thus, S. Paradzhanov created his films on the basis of creative methodology, which combines discreteness, mosaic fragmentation with over-attention to objective world, sometimes even in a situation that turns the very game of actors into conventionality. Actors are often used by the director as a kind of “signs” (objects), inscribed into general system of space-time of the film, each component of which is independent as an element of a collage work.

Conclusions

1) Analysis of creative work of S. Paradzhanov suggests that the master deliberately abandons a number of opportunities provided by the director of traditional cinematic language, manifesting such an action as the desire for “eternal movement”. In our opinion, there is no pathos or self-censorship in this act, and its origins should be sought in artistic worldview and creative methodology of the master. At the same time, probably just as consciously, S. Paradzhanov actively uses visual means of expression, first of all choosing those means that “destroy”, go against existing aesthetics of cinema of that time. This counter-action forms the general drama of the master's films, which in the viewer's imagination take the form of the “screen painting”.

Analysis of films, artworks and screenplays by S. Paradzhanov allowed us to identify three main features of his collage tools: 1) work with color and visionary elements; 2) features of visual representation of texts; 3) textures and volumes of images in the frame. In all these cases, collage of S. Paradzhanov goes beyond traditional conceptual boundaries: the master uses principles of collage thinking to build a cinematic action, and at the same time uses a number of collage techniques (such as: overlaying, breaking the scene into several parts; formation of a plane assemblage from the subject environment of characters, etc.) to destroy the dynamics and volume of the frame (or create such an effect). Collage techniques have a number of purely visual properties, which are reproduced in different ways in cinematic artistic background. It is likely that S. Paradzhanov, fully aware of this peculiarity, emphasized certain qualitative features of the collage technique, achieving the desired effect in the frame.

Collage itself is a phenomenon of postmodern aesthetics, but films of Sergey Paradzhanov elevated collage to a new level, in fact during the 1960s and 1970s the master's efforts not only changed the context of cinematic aesthetics, but also changed its general discourse. That is why, in our opinion, Paradzhanov's collage could exist only within the framework of auteur cinema in the aesthetics of Soviet art. Postmodernist thinking came to Soviet art through auteur cinema, where S. Paradzhanov was one of the key figures.

Perspectives for further research. As demonstrated by the cases cited earlier it is worth noting special closeness of S. Paradzhanov's collage thinking (in cinematic dimension) to a number of modern media phenomena such as clipping, artmedia-styling, video art, environment, etc., which allows us to assert the thesis of special importance of the master's work as a harbinger of media combinatorics. Undoubtedly, stated thesis needs further thorough research.

References

Dulgheru, E. (2014). Sergey Paradzhanov and Tengiz Abuladze: two Models of Anticommunist Testimony through Cinema in Soviet Georgia. International Journal of Orthodox Theology. 2014. 5:3, 205-217. orthodox-theology.com. https://orthodox-theology. com/media/PDF/IJOT3.2014/Dulgheru.pdf [In English].

Markhaichuk, N., Tarasov, V, etc. (2018). Collage of Sergey Paradzhanov: features of the periodization of creativity. Tradytsii ta novatsii u vyshchii arkhitekturno-khudozhnii osviti: collection of scientific works. Kharkiv State Academy of Design and Fine Arts, 4, 96-102. tihae.org. https://tihae. org//pdf/t2018-04-15-zolotukhina.pdf [In English].

Markhaichuk, N., Tarasov V, etc. (2018). Formal- stylistic and compositional features of collages by Sergey Paradzhanov. Khudozhnia kultura. Aktualni problemy : collection of scientific works. Institute of problems of contemporary art NAMU, 4, 168173. Doi: 10.31500/1992-5514.14.2018.151189 [In Ukrainian].

Rosenberg, H. (1972). The De-definition of Art; action art to pop to earthworks. archive.org. https://archive. org/details/dedefinitionofar00rose/page/8/mode/2up [In English].

Angaladjan, R. (2001). Paradzhanov: collage of shadows and colors in the range of one human heart. Zvezda. 198-206. URL: https://magazines.gorky.media/ zvezda/2001/3/paradzhanov-kollazh-teni-i-czveta- v-diapazone-odnogo-chelovecheskogo-serdcza. html [In Russian].

Bazen, A. (1972). What is cinema? Iskusstvo [In Russian].

Bezmenova, K. (2005). Collage is a creative method of XX century artists. Russkii Avangard 1910-1920-h gg., problema kollazha. Nauka. [In Russian].

Blejman, M. (1973). About cinema -- testimony. Iskusstvo. [In Russian].

Galkin, D. (2007). Techno-artistic hybrids or a work of art in the era of its computer production. Gumanitarnaja informatika, 3, 40-53. http://journals.tsu.ru/uploads/ import/1164/files/6-galkin.pdf [In Russian].

Gevorkiants, R. (2013). Paradzhanov. Kollazh na dvoih. [In Russian].

Demeshchenko, V. (2015). Creative search of the outstanding Ukrainian director Serhiy Paradzhanov. Visnyk Natsionalnoi akademii kerivnykh kadriv kultury i mystetstv, 2, 94-101. [In Ukrainian].

Demeshchenko, V (2017). Sergey Paradzhanov's work in the context of Ukrainian culture of the XX century. Kulturolohichna dumka, 11, 78-88. URL: https://www.culturology.academy/wp-content/ uploads/KD11_Demeshchenko.pdf [In Ukrainian].

Eliseeva, E. (2011). Visual images of films of poetic and conventional-poetic trends in the domestic cinema of the 70-80s of the XX century. Vestnik Cheljabinskoj gosudarstvennoj akademii kul'tury i iskusstv, 4, 101-105. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/

vizualnye-obrazy-filmov-poeticheskogo-i-uslovno- poeticheskogo-napravleniy-v-otechestvennom- kino-70-80-h-godov-xx-veka/viewer [In Russian].

Erokhin, S. (2009). Features of the use of means of artistic expression and artistic techniques in digital art. Vestnik MGOU: Serija «Filosofskie nauki», 3, 81-82. Vypusk v serii ¹ 16. Publishing house of Moscow State Regional University. vestnik-mgou. ru. https://vestnik-mgou.ru/Issue/IssueFile/179 [In Russian].

Zvereva, T. (2014). A fairy tale turned into a myth: «Ashik-Kerib» by M. Lermontov in the film interpretation of S. Parajanov. Filologicheskii klass, 4 (38), 32-37. cyberleninka.ru. https:// cyberleninka.ru/article/n/skazka-obraschennaya-v- mif-ashik-kerib-m-lermontova-v-kinointerpretatsii- s-paradzhanova/viewer [In Russian].

Kabka, G. (2013). Serhiy Paradzhanov and Yevhenia Miroshnychenko: a dialogue of iconic personalities of culture. Naukovyi visnyk Natsionalnoi muzychnoi akademii Ukrainy imeni P. Chaikovskoho, 105, 214-223. National Music Academy of Ukraine named after P. I. Tchaikovsky. [In Ukrainian].

Katanyan, V. (1994). Paradzhanov. The price of an eternal holiday. Chetyre iskusstva. [In Russian].

Klochko, D. (2013). Sergey Paradzhanov. Collage. Assembly. Album. D. Klochko (Compiler). Dukh i litera. [In Ukrainian].

Confederate, O. (2008). The phenomenon of cinema in the context of the anthropology of silence. Vestnik Cheljabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 32, 80-85. cyberleninka.ru. https://cyberleninka.ru/ article/n/fenomen-kino-v-kontekste-antropologii- molchaniya/viewer [In Russian].

Lotman, Y. (1973). Semiotics of Cinema and Problems of Cinema Aesthetics. “Jejesti Raamat”. [In Russian].

Lukashova, A. (2009). S. Parajanov's work as a phenomenon of postmodernism. Vestnik VGIK, 1, 124-132. [In Russian].

Nikoriak, N. (2013). Intermediality as a genre-creating factor (film script specifics of Serhiy Paradzhanov's “Kyiv Frescoes”). Pytannia literaturoznavstva, 88, 351-367. pytlit.chnu.edu.ua. http://pytlit.chnu.edu. ua/article/view/73251/68588 [In Ukrainian].

Paradzhanov, S. (2012). Perpetual motion. Iskusstvo kino, 12 (December). [Archive]. old.kinoart.ru. http://old.kinoart.ru/archive/2001/12/n12-article4 [In Russian].

Paradzhanov, S. (2006). The Slumbering Palace: movie scripts. Azbuka-klasika. [In Russian].

Petrova, O. (1999). Sergei Parajanov as a «playing man» in the context of transavant-garde art. Naukovi zapysky NaUKMA: 1999. Tom 9 : spetsialnyi nomer, 209-211. ekmair.ukma.edu.ua. http://ekmair. ukma.edu.ua/bitstream/handle/123456789/10439/ Petrova_Serhiy_Paradzhanov_yak_hrayucha. pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [In Ukrainian].

Petrova, O. (2015). The nature of creative activity: Sensory perception of the world by the artist as a worldview event. Naukovi zapysky NaUKMA: 1999. Volume 9: spetsialnyi nomer, 106-108. http://www. mari.kiev.ua/sites/default/files/inline-images/pdfs/ Petrova_TRETYE_OKO.pdf [In Ukrainian].

Simyan, T. (2019). Sergey Paradzhanov as a text: a person, habit, interior (based on visual texts). PRAXEMA, 3 (21), 197-215. praxema.tspu.edu. ru. https://praxema.tspu.edu.ru/files/praxema/PDF/ articles/simyan_t._s._197_215_3_21_2019.pdf [In Russian].

Trymbach, S. (2014). Sergey Paradzhanov. Texts and contexts. Ekrannyi svit Serhiia Paradzhanova: collection of atricles. Yu. Morozov (Complier). Dukh i Litera. [In Ukrainian].

Tsereteli, K. (2008). Collage on the background of a self-portrait. Life is a game: monograph. Nizhny Novgorod. [In Russian].

Yutkevych, S. (1978). Political cinema models. [In Russian].

Yamborko, O. (2014). Sergei Paradzhanov's paintings and fine arts. Serhii Paradzhanov i Ukraina: collection of articles and documents. Editorial Board of Kino-Teatr magazine; Kyiv-Mohyla Academy Publishing House. [In Ukrainian].

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru