Analysis Of Uspensky's Structural Typology Of Art

Uspensky's main task is to construct the structural typology of art, to show common types of structural practices of artistic text of literature and painting, by analyzing their internal organizational structure. Doing this job is based on two circumstances. On one hand, works of art have different degrees of enclosing, on the other hand, locations of authors, narrators and story characters have formed various types of viewpoints and relationships between them. In accordance with the "hypothesis-examples-induction" idea, Uspensky assumes that there are levels which is about to points of view on ideology, parole, space-time, psychology and executes discussions to find the possibility of constructing a unified text on different structural types of works.Works of art have their own time and space organizational norms and value system. The acceptance process is that the reader proceeds from outside into the internal world made by border delineation, becomes familiar with the rules of organization, then gets out of the works. Borders mean boundary lines. Borders have different levels, and it helps relative compositions make up works. They can be nested with each other, leading to "border of the border", "story of the story". Paintings' space is usually made up by a combination of several micro-space, as the background space is usually conveyed in the form of door or window frame, which would be called "picture in the picture" where the screen divide into the main scene and the background, foreground and background. The main scene is the center of the structure, while the background appears in the periphery. Borders are usually used as material and methods to construct the background, emphasizing the illusion of the background and making center of the works more realistic.Broad academic horizon, clever rhetorical device, a large number of vivid examples and detailed analysis constitute the structural typology of arts. Elaborating from relations of internal and external, personal and common, Uspensky gets a deep and general theory. Although parts of the discussion reflect not only the internal and external relations, also the personal and common relations, the whole theoretical construction has horizontal and vertical features. On way of thinking, the structural typology theory of art is good at summarizing on all types of view, showing holistic, systematic thinking characteristics. At the same time, he coordinates variety of binary, reflecting the characteristics of transition from binary thinking to the symbiosis of diverse thinking.Uspensky's cultural semiotics and structural typology are born under the absence of adequate exchanging with modern western social and human sciences, and there isn't solid philosophical foundation. He absorbs nutrients only from information theory, systems theory and cultural sociology. Identifying, re-using different ideas show his exploring courage and value of his theory, while the impaction on Narrative of European and American proved it valuable.Uspensky abandons defects of formalism and vulgar artistic sociology, introducing the social and historical background, different national arts, phrase, author and readers into structure analysis. However, it is so difficult to combine analysis of the structure with social property, cultural property of authors perfectly. He is positive to investigate society and culture, but he doesn't generalize each other, sometimes considering the structure as an existence of reason and concept, replacing the subject of the person with the language structure as the starting point of consideration, neglecting the history and cultural properties of author and social, and lead to the shortcomings of his theory.