Iranian art is one of the richest artistic heritages in the world comprising different fields such as architecture, paintings, weaving, pottery, calligraphy, metalworking, petrography, etc. This art had inseparable link with nature; especially with plants and animals in different eras; and it has been interwoven with poetry and literature so that its glory, beauty and expression have increased over time. In this study, based on available resources and collections in the museums of the world, fish imagery depicted in ancient Iranian art has been studied and its importance is discussed from different perspectives. The use of plant and animal imagery, especially fish, in the ancient works such as stone, clay, bronze and fabric (textile) has a long history of several thousand years and the fish has been used as a symbol of religion, culture, social relationships and economy. On the other hand, fish imagery presents the past fish fauna, and along with the archaeological remains, provides information about the fish biodiversity, which is usually consistent with the recent ichthyodiversity.

In this Article the main discussion is about the role of intuition in creating and forming ARTWORK." Bergson's" philosophy of art more than other philosophies discusses about the intuition. By analizing "Bergson's" views about intuition and art we seek to answer this question: whether art work is produced by thought or intuition? In order to finding answer the intuitional believes of "Croce"and "Coling wood" in philosophy of art is concerned which deals with the subjects such as: symbolic knowledge versus intuitive  knowledge, emotional expression versus imaginative expression and the difference between the artistic creation and understanding with pure rational activities. On the other hand by presenting a brief discussion about the function and origin of intuition in understanding ARTWORKs, we deals with three main art's fields: ARTWORK, artist, reader (addressee), . which are in challenge as the origin of ARTWORK. By considering the modern hermeneutic , reception theory of meaning, and the "Iser's" view on knowledge of signs (traces), meaning ambiguity and defamilirization, we try to analize the process of intuition from artist (Autor) to ARTWORK and from ARTWORK to reader(addressee).    

Please click on pdf file to view the abstract.

Studying the development of form in art history is a fundamental theory in ARTWORKs iconology. It is possible to study the history of art through investigating the shape of ARTWORKs, or art forms aesthetics. The history of art is established on the base of ARTWORKs build up and form creation rather than the power of ARTWORK critics’ interpretation and criticisms.Although the artist's mentality is prior to their final objective work, but it is the objectivity and imaginary system of ARTWORKs that make up the history of art. Art is born by making up, although the artist, before creating his ARTWORK, has an imagination of what is to be made. It is the knowledge and technical skills that make it possible that the mental pictures change into ARTWORK.The artist with his active imagination power creates a form of what should be made and then by using the right material makes it perceivable. A subjectivity which does not gain visible form exists in the mind of its owner as an imagination. An inventor who is technically unable to give birth to his ideas is not reckoned as an inventor. A poet, who is not able to express or write down his poems, is not called a poet. Imaginary forms of an artist can originate from different tales, narratives, and motifs and subjects or even personal feelings. The content or massages that can be religious, moral, humanistic, social, political and ideological, or personal reaction of the artist. ARTWORK, visible quality and this kind of subjects which in form aesthetics and form creation manners, by the artist gain perceptibility.any understanding, interpretation and critic is possible only through art forms. An ARTWORK is considered such on the base of its aesthetic values form and expression rather than its massage and content, neither on the base of its content perception by the addressee.Cognition and structural interpretation, methods and expression way of the artist can be studied through the morphological approaches, not through the semantics of the work. Indeed any meaning perception is possible only through morphology and structural interpretation of an artistic object.

The problem that there are relations between moral values and aesthetic values is a most important concern of the philosophy of art today. In the other words, the question is whether ethical criticism relates to aesthetic criticism. In response to this question, three positions have been adopted, among which the position of moderate advocates seems acceptable. Moderate advocates agree that there are relations between moral values and aesthetic values, but disagree on how they relate to each other. They believe that moral virtue/vice and aesthetic merit/demerit are related to each other in several ways. Here, it can be found, at least, four important views worth speaking of: (1) sometimes a moral virtue in a work of art becomes an aesthetic merit in it, (2) sometimes a moral vice in a work of art becomes an aesthetic demerit in it, (3) sometimes a moral vice in a work of art results in an aesthetic merit in it, and (4) sometimes an aesthetic merit in a work of art results in a moral virtue.

Theodor Adorno is one of those philosophers who give a high position to art in their thought. That is, without having a true conception of his ideas on art, one cannot capture very much of his thoughts. The same is true for other philosophers like Kant and Hegel. I believe that Adorno's most important concern regarding art was its dialectical relation with the empirical or everyday-world and the status quo. The reason is that for Adorno art is the only sphere of life which has escaped the ossified relations of the capitalist world and has been a shelter for qualified freedom. It is only in ARTWORKs that one can hear of the real pain and suffering, the pain of living in a reified society where no room is left for true life. This paper is not a comprehensive discussion of Adorno's ideas. I have just tried to present the most important discussions in Adorno's writings on the relation between art and the empirical world. The leading thread of this paper is the ways through which art criticizes the status quo. In the first section, I will focus on the concept of Culture Industry in order to give a clear description of what Adorno contrasts with the autonomous art. In the second section, I will investigate the dialectical relation between ARTWORKs and the empirical world. And in the last section, I will put forward the discussions concerning the form and content of ARTWORKs and their relation to social criticism.

 Claude Monet is known as the pioneer of the first completely modern movement in painting by presenting a different painting. In this work, instead of a completely naturalistic description of a sunrise scene, he records the immediate impact of the landscape on the eye by focusing on the transformations of light and color. In this way, nature in Claude Monet's works is more than the subject, it is an excuse for experiments that make him to leave the workshop and bring him a scientific and new vision to light and colour in contrast to the typical workshop painting style.In sunrise scene, Claude Monet shows a way of perception and vision that critics use the word "impression" to describe it. In his impressionist paintings, he is searching for a way to record the immediate visual perception of the subject, which in this regard changes the previous fixed principles in the field of painting and in general the thinking of the audience of the work. So that it provides a new description and interpretation of the usual and familiar category of nature.The nature in Monet's paintings shows that the painter is more concerned with describing nature than trying to find a way to record the immediate visual perception of the subject. Monet's special way of seeing nature makes it dependent on the individual experience of the artist from an independent and unchanging presence.His emphasis on visibility shows that the nature of the subject depends on the fleeting light conditions and that the subject of the painting is not visible to everyone in the same way. In this regard, by using the new theories of the emergence of colour and following the previous achievements of Barbizon painters, he turns nature from a completely naturalistic treatment into an excuse for another way of seeing and representing nature. By focusing on the change that governs nature and also human perception, Monet diminishes objective reality in contrast to sensory perception. Focusing on the transitory and fleeting states of nature, he reveals an invisible and absolutely necessary field to make nature visible.  The idea of series paintings by prioritizing the atmospheric conditions, for the first time diminishes the importance of the subject of the painting and encourages the painter's eye to push back the main subject and focus more on the invisible field, which makes the subject visible.At this time, the visible subject finds the rule of a reflecting mirror, which records the invisible conditions of every variable in a random state. With this preparation, Monet reveals the issue of how the subject of the painting has an existential cause related to an invisible realm. Based on this, Monet changes the framework of attention from the visible subject to the realm of invisibility, which, above all, requires the use of a method different from the common method.Unlike the previous painter, Monet is much less concerned with the description of the subject, beyond that, he is trying to achieve a pure visual-pictorial expression and to induce a sense of the subject to the audience. In This kind of painting, subject turns from a stable presence based on the pure principles of design into forms resulting from the capture of a moment, which their display requires concentration, speed and a special attitude of the painter. In this definition, the sense of the subject is more real than its solid shell, and in this way, the constructionist of nature is discarded and the solid structure of the form transformed in the rapid effects of light and colour.The difference that Monet creates in the history of painting is that this time he gives priority to the background environment. By changing the frame of attention from the main subject of the painting to the surrounding environment, Monet transforms the interaction between nature and the environment.Also, by using visual methods, he looks at a place in the image space that has been considered an unimportant background until now. In this regard, the paintings of Monet's collection realize the visualization of the invisible conditions of visible elements. This collection shows the constantly changing level of the interaction of elements and the surrounding environment, and more than the subject, it tries to capture an invisible position. Monet solves this issue in his painting by recording momentary perceptions, immediacy in execution, focusing on transitory and accidental states, and constructing the structure of objects and analyzing shapes in favour of representing the transformations of light. The broken colour technique, by ignoring the consistent linear format of the shapes, turns the canvas in to a field of continuous colour vibration and colour effects.Therefore, Monet's painting is the field of showing the simultaneous possibilities of visible and invisible, continuity and discontinuity. The elements of nature appear in Monet's painting through an invisible frame, and then, drowning in the distant dimension, they always stay back and remain invisible. Monet captures the visual effect of light without paying attention to the subject and presents relationships in the painting that until then had an unclear and dumb understanding.By introducing a new kind of perception and vision, Monet shows that; Rather than describing nature, the painter is trying to find a way to record the immediate visual perception of the subject. Monet's special way of seeing nature turns nature from an independent and static presence to the individual experience of the artist and his emphasis on his way of seeing and perceiving the moment and the transitory and dynamic conditions of light and atmosphere. This nature is the nature that the painter's eyes see. A method arising from the transformation of the painter's way of seeing, which leads to the transformation of the objective reality and negation of the validity of the subject. Therefore, Monet's paintings show the process of transformation of his look. So that the painting canvas is the field of emergence of the painter's perception in the face of the universe.  .

When we are talking about ARTWORK, what are we talking about? Is the meaning of art as a kind of accurate representation of the world as realists may believe it, or are we talking about extrapolation to human psychological states that, as an artist, evaporates from its psychological state? Each of these questions will inevitably lead us to believe in a form of representation of something original and pre-existing. Whether the world, whether nature and society, or the psychological state of the artist-fears, frustrations, love, hatred, and other psychological situations. In this paper, we have tried to illustrate how some of the phenomenological concepts of Edmund Husserl’, s literature show how the ARTWORK is a form of representing the meaning of the world, as it has been given in the artist’, s intentional and none-reflective experience. To do this we have tried to provide a proper definition of the concepts we have in Husserl. meanwhile, we tried to establish the proportions that are necessary to achieve the goal of our research. Our basic questions are about the work of art, body and its relationship with the work of art and its perception, as well as the fundamental relationship between the artist and the work of art. We devoted ourselves to trying to demonstrate the artistic nature of art in general and ARTWORK in particular. We tried to enlighten the relationship between the ARTWORK as an object and the objectivity of art-between what the objectivity of art is, and what, as it may be, in the realist approach of art, the ARTWORK as an object is. We also examined the importance of the artist’, s intentional experiences during the creation of ARTWORK. We also tried to illustrate the importance of the artist’, s relation to the world around him in virtue of his livingbody, both in the production of ARTWORK and in understanding it. Our attempt to demonstrate the attachment of ARTWORK to a natural approach has also examined the relationship between truth claims and art in a phenomenological reading. This, of course, is only a preliminary attempt to move towards a formulation by which we might be able to find new possible truth foundations in art and ARTWORKs. We are totally writing against representationalism in an understanding of art, be it a positive approach to representation or a negative one. We proceed toward our research by some prepositions,such as Art is something autonomous which is not bound to any scientific approaches,Arti is not A representation of something it creates the world,by such a creation art provides a non-scientific foundation for human conversation as a tool for improving the world as an inter-subjective world shared in our inter-bodily existence. We also decided to apply Husserlian Conceptions in regard to prepare an answer for anti-foundationalist accounts of art which totally deform what we know as Art and reduce Art to a kind of self-expression of a soloistic Subject which they call an artist. It is of course just an introductory essay.