The Mythic-Archetypal Criticism In Landscape Art

Criticism is a serious academic practice based on a systematic theory.However,there is currently a lack of methodology for landscape criticism both domestically and internationally.Scholars mostly criticize using design theory,which cannot be called true criticism.On the other hand,criticism in other art disciplines such as literature will inevitably first break away from the discipline itself and examine works with specialized critical theories.Otherwise,either we can only talk about the situation and find it difficult to extract universal principles;Either it can only float on the surface and cannot discern the essence of the problem.Therefore,it is necessary to intensify research on the methodology of landscape architecture criticism.As long as the discipline enters a virtuous cycle,the landscape is naturally beautiful.Mythic-archetypal criticism belongs to the category of criticism methodology and is one of the criticism modes.It is listed as one of the three most influential and popular criticism modes by American literature critic René Wellek.The literary myth of archetypal criticism originated in UK in the early 20 th century and flourished in the 1950 s and 1960 s.The theoretical basis of mythical criticism is mainly anthropology and psychology,and the terms "myth" and "archetype" also come from these two disciplines.Through tracing,it can be concluded that firstly,the goal of Mythic-archetypal criticism is to interpret meaning,but its previous critical paradigm was mainly applicable to the fields of literature and other arts.Therefore,in order to apply it to the interpretation of the meaning of landscape,it is necessary to adjust its applicability based on the characteristics of landscape.Secondly,Mythic-archetypal criticism has a long history of development,and the role and composition of its basic theories are also constantly evolving.Therefore,it is necessary to base oneself on the present and face the future,and rethink the rationality of its current basic theory.This article is written in the way of logical reasoning,taking abductive reasoning as the logic of argument,using the method of pragmatism to select the basic theory,using the method of compound definition to use the basic theory,and using the principles of generalized semiotics,generalized hermeneutics and structuralism to study the basic theory.On the one hand,it makes up for the shortcomings of the traditional semiotics basic theory,and on the other hand,it meets the applicability requirements of landscape,aiming to build a landscape Mythic-archetypal criticism methodology to guide the practice of criticism.The entire argument is divided into three stages,namely tracing,constructing,and analyzing.The first stage is tracing.Firstly,a horizontal applicability evaluation of mythicarchetypal criticism is conducted,and based on issues such as landscape attributes and critical turns,a landscape applicability construction approach for mythic-archetypal criticism is proposed.Then,it makes a longitudinal analysis of the connotation and traditional basic theories of literature mythic-archetypal criticism,and summarizes that mythic-archetypal criticism paradigm mainly includes two aspects: one is to build a holistic vision of structuralism,the other is to point to multi-dimensional criticism in multi-level context.The second stage is the construction.This paper uses the pragmatic method to select,and uses the method of composite definition to draw the rich ideological resources of generalized semiotics as the discourse tool of landscape meaning exposition,so as to continue the purport and meaning of my archetypal criticism,and make it regain life in the new era and art field.First,the landscape semiosis process is mapped to Pierce’s symbol,and then the semiotics principle is used as the discussion framework to reveal the interrelationship of various elements in the landscape semiosis process and the principle of the occurrence of the semiosis process.In the process of landscape Semiosis,one of the nodes is called "Landscape Moneme",which is a landscape construction unit with ideographic autonomy.It replaces the concepts of "landscape scenery" and "landscape elements" and specifically serves the study of landscape meaning.The third stage is analysis.The analysis is divided into four parts: the generation of landscape meaning,the implication of landscape meaning,the expression of landscape meaning,and the interpretation of landscape meaning.It theoretically explains the principle of landscape meaning representation and proposes operational principles for understanding landscape meaning.Firstly,it is believed that the meaning of landscape is not naturally generated by landscape,but rather artificially endowed.Moreover,the implantation of meaning into the landscape by humans is a psychological ’connection’.Specifically,Nature context and Culture context are the initial sources of landscape meaning,and these initial "mythological archetypes" are the most common psychological cognition of humans.It includes both Jung’s archetype shared by all humanity and the primitive myths of various ethnic groups around the world.At the same time,based on the differences in people’s relational thinking,"mythological archetype" will undergo diversified evolution,and these evolved "mythological archetype" are the reasons for regional and cultural differences.After the meaning of the landscape is generated,it can only be reflected in one place at a time.If it is to be expanded in terms of time length and geographical breadth,it needs to be typified and conventionalized.Conventionalization at the formal level is more important and can be divided into four situations.When a person repeats their gardening methods multiple times,a landscape pattern is formed.When multiple gardeners of the same era repeat certain methods,a landscape convention is formed.When certain methods are repeatedly repeated for certain groups over time,a landscape genre is formed.When gardeners of different eras and regions repeat certain methods,a landscape type is formed.Secondly,as a supersymbol,landscape provides a multi-level context for the representation of meaning.In different contexts,landscape symbols have different symbolic ways.This study focuses on exploring three issues in the expression of landscape meaning,namely the dominance,artistry,and innovation of landscape meaning expression.The exploration of the dominant issue of landscape is an adaptive adjustment to the classic mythic-archetypal criticism,transforming the original text-based concept into a human-centered one,and transforming the more complex dominant subject into an easily grasped narrator.The discussion on the artistry of landscape combines the critical theory of Russian formalism,inherits the importance of the classic mythic-archetypal criticism on art form,and also supplements the influence of art content on the meaning of landscape.In the exploration of innovative issues in landscape,from the perspective of mythic-archetypal criticism,the classic landscape or landscape types are regarded as secondary sources of meaning generation in landscape,that is,the classic landscape and landscape types are equivalent to a type of "mythological archetype".Based on this cognitive foundation,attempts are made to systematize the innovative methods of landscape from both the form and content aspects.Then,the interpretation of the meaning of landscape types is the main task of landscape mythic-archetypal criticism,which mainly relies on the meaning structure of landscape.Believing that the dominant factor of the meaning structure of landscape is a person’s ideal for poetic life.Different cognitive models have different understandings of’poetic dwelling’,resulting in different types of landscapes.This ideal is rooted in people’s understanding of the real world,which is reflected in the relationship between heaven,earth,and humans,namely the Nature context and Culture context.Due to the characteristic of convention in the landscape type itself,the understanding of its meaning is relatively unified,and its understanding process tends to be an abstract speculative process.Finally,when understanding individual landscapes,the process of understanding involves specific feelings and observations,and the content and depth of understanding also vary from person to person.Therefore,at this point,it is necessary to consider the three practical situations in which people understand the landscape,namely the interpretation of the author’s intention,the interpretation of the text’s expression,and the readers’ feelings and thoughts related to their own experiences.This study provides three actionable criticism methods for each meaning,which based on the characteristics of three meanings-namely,criticism methods from the content,form,and overall perspectives.In summary,this study provides a total of 10 methods that can be used for landscape mythic-archetypal criticism,which are applicable to different critical needs.They are:(1)the method of criticizing the tonality of gardens through the meaning structure of gardens,(2)The method of criticizing the author centered garden form through the narrative reading of Narratology,(3)The method of criticizing the author centered garden content through hermeneutic psychoanalysis,(4)The method of criticizing the whole garden centered on the author through the images of the mind of Semiotics,(5)The method of criticizing the text centered garden form through the structural reading of Narratology,(6)The method of criticizing textual centered garden content through the pan art theory of hermeneutics,(7)Through the method of Following the name and responsibility to the truth of Semiotics to criticize the text centered garden as a whole,(8)The method of criticizing the reader centered garden form through the symbolic reading of Narratology,(9)The method of criticizing the reader centered garden content through the fusion of hermeneutic perspectives,(10)Through the infinite extension of Semiotics,it is a method of criticizing the whole garden centered on readers.