تحلیل نقش متقابل هنرمند و جامعه در تفکر جلیل ضیاءپور (با تاکید بر نظریات باستید، پلخانف و کالینگوود)

Introduction: Ziapour may be influenced by Art's Sake concept, Clive Bell's meaningful form, or even André Lhote's thoughts. However, he attempts to provide solutions for achieving grace in painting by relying on the fundamentals of the visual arts and integrating other media into the art medium. Upon his return to Iran, amidst an increase in social freedoms, he began providing written sources on modern art. He believed modern art was the only proper art form and introduced this concept through his publications (Pakbaz, 2008: 889). Despite his publications, Ziapour's theories played a significant role in establishing the foundations of modern Iranian art. In 1943, he established the Academy of Fine Arts for Boys and Girls, where artists such as Tanavoli, Zenderoudi, Arabshahi, and Pilaram were trained. These artists went on to become the standard bearers of modern Iranian painting. Jalil Ziapour is a significant figure in contemporary Iranian art due to his contributions to theorizing and explaining modern art principles through articles and books and his teaching in educational institutions. In 1949, he presented his artistic statement in Kavir magazine under the label "perfect school." He explained that the foundation of his statement came from the heart of the community, and he did not intend to adhere to orders and theories. However, his statement seems paradoxical because he believes society imposes themes on painters. Nevertheless, he also considers the negation of themes and reliance on aesthetics as a request from society. Therefore, the question arises about the mutual role of artists and society according to Jalil Ziapour's "perfect school" statement and how to resolve this paradox.
Research Method: The objective of the present qualitative study is fundamental, and descriptive data were collected using content analysis. The statement "perfect school" is analyzed as a case study considered among specific and limited cases to thoroughly comprehend every aspect that can disclose the case studied (Creswell, 2012, p. 101). With an inductive approach, the content analysis method enables the researcher to investigate the content of the selected data objectively and systematically to measure the variables (Rogerdi, 2005: 314). Additionally, it offers a method for reading the text, a correct comprehension of material that appears irrelevant, and a method for qualitative information analysis (Boyatzis, 1998: 4). Therefore, the interactive relationship between the artist and society, as well as the artist's position regarding the function of people in art, were extracted from the present statement and subsequently analyzed. Then, the perspectives of Roger Bastide, Plekhanov, and Collingwood were utilized to resolve the existing paradox.
Artist and society's roles in Ziapour's painting and manifesto: Based on the manifesto of the perfect school, Ziapour mentions the role of society, people, and life in art in four cases:

a) Themeism in painting is influenced by society and people:

In his statement, he discussed how art was liberated from religious themes with the invention of writing (Rafierad and Makinejad, 2022: 30). He believed that even though a painter may try to avoid public themes, it would be impossible because their environment and society influence them. It means that society does not allow the artist to remove the theme from their painting altogether. Instead, by emphasizing their individuality, the painter reflects the specialized aesthetics of the artwork.

b) Negation of the representation of life scenes in a painting by Perfect School:

"If the purpose of painting in its initial stage is to depict various scenes of life, i.e., to create themes, then this is writing," he says (ibid., p. 3). Therefore, he believes that paintings should not depict scenes from everyday life. Color, design, form, and composition are the only tools a painter can use to attain the essence of painting.

c) The perfect school makes artists and people understand the reality of the aesthetic concept of painting:

Ziapour states in paragraph (c) of the conclusion that since the writing of the Manifesto, the artist and the people have comprehended their mission to remove natural and near-natural images from paintings. In the future, to learn the beauty of a picture, they will refer directly to the artistic elements and not to the motifs or content of the images. It will be the initial phase in which both the artist and the public realize the actuality of the concept of specialized beauty or specialized aesthetics.

d) The perfect school is a requirement of society and the environment:

In paragraph (d) of the conclusion, Ziapour argues that this statement does not exist outside of society's requirements and was created within an organization to meet those needs. He states, "No new method is ever created without the need of the environment, and no request can ever be in advance of the request of its time. Because every desire has a cause, the primary cause of each motivated desire exists within the community of desires. Therefore, my theory is not and cannot be outside the present demand" (ibid: 15).
Conclusion: Ziapour's views on Iran's contemporary art are among Iran's most influential cultural and aesthetic philosophy sources. The developments that his publications, articles, and other works have introduced to the history of contemporary art in Iran have significantly impacted the artistic perception and knowledge of society and artists. Ziapour's manifesto, which included innovations such as parasites (mediums other than painting), distant unnatural figures, and the like, was published to establish a solid foundation for painting's aesthetics. On the one hand, this manifesto asserts that thematic painting is influenced by societal demand. In contrast, in the perfect school, the artist negates all themes in the painting and provides the aesthetics of a painting that relies solely on color, line, design, form, and composition, eschewing both natural and unnatural forms. At the same time, this school was established in response to a request from society and the environment and is a response to the requirements of society. These two points of view cannot both be realized simultaneously.
Nevertheless, based on the opinions of specific sociologists and art theorists, such as Plekhanov and Collingwood, this paradox can be resolved, as this social influence can be explained by the unique trend of Ziapour's contemporary art. In this way, the artist, with the self-awareness individual that he has created in modern art, negates the theme, causing the society that forced the artist to accept the theme in the painting to look at the actual values of the painting and the limits of the medium of painting to be explained to them. It corresponds to the obligation that Collingwood deems art to have in preventing the disintegration of consciousness in society. However, there will still be many issues, and the answers to each can pave the way for the analysis of the history of contemporary Iranian art and contribute to the expansion of the fundamental concept of Iranian.